Circular reasoning is when an argument assumes what it’s trying to prove. Though often considered fallacies, circular arguments aren’t always illogical; they’re usually just too arbitrary to be persuasive. Yet some circular reasoning is necessary for logical thinking. Here’s how to detect—and avoid using—the fallacious kind of circular reasoning.
Up Next in S2: Fallacies
-
Do Christians Use Circular Reasoning?
One objection to Christianity is that it’s circular reasoning to say, “God’s Word is true because the Bible says so.” And left at that, this argument is indeed circular. Does that mean Christianity is founded on a fallacy? The short answer is no, but let’s unpack why.
-
Valid Conditional Arguments
Conditional arguments use “if-then” statements, like “If God created humans, then all humans have value.” The “if” is the antecedent, and the “then” is the consequent. Let’s look at 3 valid types of conditional arguments: Affirming the Antecedent, Denying the Consequent, and Hypothetical Syllogis...
-
Affirming the Consequent
Subtle, persuasive, and almost always illogical, Affirming the Consequent is a flawed “if-then” argument which argues that an “if” statement is true because a “then” statement is true. Like “If your car is out of gas, it won’t start. It won’t start; therefore, it’s out of gas.” Using real evoluti...
