Circulus in Probando (Circular Reasoning)

”One might think the fallacy would be so obvious that no one would ever commit it, but that is not the case.”¹

Etymology:

• The Latin term “Circulus in Probando” translates to “a circle in proof”.

Definition:

• When the beginning and the end of a chain of proof are the same, it’s called the Circular Reasoning Fallacy.
• The argument circles back on itself without providing independent explanation/evidence for its claim.

Avoiding the Pitfalls of Circular Reasoning by ASAT

Details:

Circular Reasoning is an informal fallacy. The argument goes: X happens due to Y, Y happens due to Z, and Z happens due to X. This is a circular argument.

Types of Circular Reasoning:

1. Petitio Principii (Begging the Question): Happens when the premise already includes the conclusion.

   1. Restating the Conclusion: Restating the conclusion but using different words to make it sound more reasonable.
      • Example:
        • X: “A taxation system of that kind will never succeed, because it cannot work.”
      • Counter:
        • Ask for an explanation: “Can you please explain why the taxation system cannot work?”
   2. Assuming Unstated Premises: Relying on premises that are unstated or unexplained.
      • Example:
        • X: “We must reduce taxes to improve the economy.”
        • Y: “How will reducing taxes improve the economy?”
        • X: “Because the best way to improve the economy is to reduce the taxes.”
      • Counter:
        • Challenge the unexplained premise: “Is there any data that supports what you are stating?”
   3. Loaded Question: Assumes something to be true without explaining why.
      • Example:
        • X: “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
        • (Assumes you are beating your wife, and either answer “Yes” or “No” will mean that you have beaten your wife.)
      • Counter:
        • Directly address the assumption: “I do not condone any violence in my relationship.”
        • Highlight the flaw: “You are assuming that I’m beating my wife without any evidence. It is childish to use such Loaded Questions.”

2. Petitio Principii (Circular Definition): Term which is defined using the term itself.

   • Example:
     • X: “A woman is someone who identifies as a woman.”
     • (The definition needs to be independent without using the term itself; here, “woman” is used as a term for defining “woman.”)
   • Counter:
     • Highlight the flaw: “You cannot use the term itself to define a term. This is what we call a Circular Definition fallacy.”
     • Use a proper and clear definition: “Sorry, but a woman is an adult human female.”
     • (One should use both of these counters to properly respond.)

3. Circular Explanation: Restates the original assertion without adding anything new.

   • Example:
     • X: “Why do we need laws?”
     • Y: “Because without laws, we would have anarchy.”
     • X: “What is anarchy?”
     • Y: “It is a situation where there are no laws.”
   • Counter:
     • Ask for an explanation: “Can you explain how the lack of laws leads to anarchy?”

4. Assuming the Conclusion: As the name implies, it’s when the conclusion is assumed already.

   • Example:
     • X: “Lying is wrong because it’s wrong to lie.”
     • (No explanation has been given on why it is wrong; it just assumes that lying is wrong.)
   • Counter:
     • Ask for an explanation: “Can you explain why exactly lying is wrong?”

Why?

Why is it a Fallacy?

The reason why Circular Reasoning is a fallacy is because it is fallacious. Nah, I’m kidding. It is a fallacy because to prove something or to disprove it, you need independent confirmation/evidence. Circular Reasoning repeats its own claims without external verifiable confirmation. It creates a circular chain where it tries to validate itself but fails. Similar to attempting to lift yourself by pulling your own leg, nothing happens, and at worst, you fall down.

Why would someone do this?

Different reasons exist for using various types of circular reasoning fallacies.

• Lack of Knowledge on Logic: Some fallacies, like Assuming Unstated Premises or Restating the Conclusion, might come from a lack of understanding of logical reasoning.
• Deception: Loaded questions are used to deceive by assuming something negative about the proponent.
• Making a Point Without Knowledge: Circular Explanation and Assuming the Conclusion fallacies can happen when a proponent tries to make a point or wants to say something without any knowledge.

When Is It Fair to Use?

Never, that’s it, never.

References

Footnotes

1. Irving M. Copi, Carl Cohen, and Kenneth McMahon, Introduction to Logic, 14th ed. (2014), 140. ↩