
	Where results make sense

Topic: Circular argument

Related Topics

Logical fallacy

Teleology

Historical thinking

Evolution

Process

American football

Much Ado About Nothing

President of South Africa

List of Prime Ministers of South Africa

Ministers of the South African Government

In the News (Thu 24 Dec 09)

Northern Trust

Marvin Harrison

Peter Chernin

Gary Locke

Match Play

Penelope Cruz

Mickey Rourke

AR Rahman

Danny Boyle

Hugh Jackman

	PlanetMath: circular reasoning
		The step surrounded by brackets is faulty because it actually uses the axiom of choice, which is what is to be proven.
		This is version 10 of circular reasoning, born on 2006-07-25, modified 2006-08-20.
		For example, the entry ``circular reasoning'' by Wkbj79 expresses a logic tautology because we are using in the reasoning the self-evident $g*g^{-1}=e_G$.
	planetmath.org /encyclopedia/CircularReasoning.html (282 words)

	Logic and Literary Argument
		To put this more generally and in terms of literary argument, the bird reads the world as providing a certain definition of serpent and from that reading the bird concludes that Alice is a serpent.
		Circular reasoning often sounds right, as it does to the bird, but it is invalid nonetheless.
		It is often hard to recognize reasoning as circular because the steps between the first and last may be many or because we may have the feeling that there are suppressed premises that are nonetheless pleasant and clinch the connections.
	www-personal.umich.edu /~esrabkin/LogicLitArg.htm (2905 words)

	20th WCP: Circularity and Stability
		The kind of circularity involved in this argument is not logical circularity because the conclusion that sense perception is reliable is not used as one of the premises.
		Circularity it is nevertheless because we cannot take ourselves to be justified in accepting the premises unless we assume that sense perception is reliable.
		Even though we cannot show without circularity that sense perception is reliable, we can show, in his view, that it is rational to go on forming beliefs on the basis of sense perception and other customary sources of belief and that it is rational to assume that these sources are reliable.
	www.bu.edu /wcp/Papers/TKno/TKnoLamm.htm (3331 words)

	THE HEURISTICS OF LEGAL REASONING
		However since this argument requires one to assume materialism, and since our demonstration of the operation of practical reasoning seems adequate even if "good" and 'evil' were fictions, the materialist position seems actually less certain - though it is a valid position, if one presupposes that all phenomena are in fact material.
		Essentially this argument presumes the opposite of the conclusion to be proven, disproves a necessary condition precedent to the contrary conclusion and infers that therefor the desired conclusion must be true.
		The truly problematic category of circularity in patterns of inference is the form of reasoning which is generally construed as faulty but which in fact is valid.
	www.geocities.com /engleerica/Circle.htm (3135 words)

	Redding.com: Blogs
		In logic, begging the question is the term for a type of fallacy occurring in deductive reasoning in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in one of the premises.
		Those who use this variation are explaining that the argument lacks a premise, and they have missed the self-circularity of the argument because of it.
		Argument over whether this usage should be considered incorrect is an example of the debate between linguistic prescription and description.
	blogs.scripps.com /cgi-bin/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=42287 (1091 words)

	Lesson 2: Logic and Critical Thinking
		Argument: A set of statements, some of which serve as premises, one of which serves as a conclusion, such that the premises purport to give evidence for the conclusion.
		Sometimes arguments are incompletely stated; sometimes the conclusion of an argument is not given explicitly because the person giving the argument hopes that it will be clear that the reasons given lead to it.
		But as noted, when we are evaluating arguments it is a good idea to separate the premises from the conclusion, and to put the argument into “standard form.” We say that an argument is in standard form when the premises are numbered and listed separately, and when the conclusion is clearly written underneath them.
	www.public.iastate.edu /~jwcwolf/Papers/argument.html (2910 words)

	FOSSILS AND ROCKS: CIRCULAR REASONING (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-12)
		"Circular reasoning" is a method of false logic, by which "this is used to prove that, and that is used to prove this." It is also called "reasoning in a circle." Over a hundred years ago it was described by the phrase, circulus in probando, which is Latin for "a circle in a proof."
		There are several types of circular reasoning found in support of evolutionary theory.
		This is where the suspicion of circular reasoning crept in, because it seemed to the layman that the time units were abstracted from the geological column, which has been put together from rock units."—*J.E. O'Rourke, "Pragmatism vs. Materialism in Stratigraphy," American Journal of Science, January 1979, p.
	www.pathlights.com /ce_encyclopedia/12fos11.htm (1386 words)

	An Argument for Freedom Based Upon Disagreement by Michael S. Rozeff
		I will present a very simple argument that the State and government are not and cannot be logically justified or defended as long as there are those under their rule who disagree with their (aggressive) impositions.
		They have in common the framework of argumentation and thus disagreement, the notion that justification doesn’t rely on coercion, and the outcome that the defender of the State is placed in an untenable position.
		Argumentation ethics place the defender of socialism in the contradictory position of supporting an institution that belies the implications of their arguing.
	www.lewrockwell.com /rozeff/rozeff77.html (1666 words)

	[A06] Argument Analysis - Good Arguments
		If an argument is sound in that it is valid and all the premises are true, then of course the conclusion of the argument must also be true.
		Whether this argument is circular depends on your definition of a "circular argument".
		A good argument is an argument that is either valid or strong, and with plausible premises that are true, do not beg the question, and are relevant to the conclusion.
	philosophy.hku.hk /think/arg/goodarg.php (844 words)

	Circular logic - Encyclopedia Dramatica
		Example of circular logic, feel free to use this as an image macro
		Circular logic is where one bullshit argument is proven by another bullshit argument which is in turn proven by a third bullshit arguement, until eventually your original argument is proven by itself.
		Stupid people will actually fall for this and then a winnar is you, clever people however will see through your flawed points.
	www.encyclopediadramatica.com /index.php/Circular_logic (220 words)

	MathPath
		Since the argument is an ordered list of statements, each of which is either one of the premises or "derivable" from the combination of some subset of the preceding statements and one or more axiom, errors are possible in this organization.
		Suppose that the conclusion is assumed in the premise.
		We have considered circular reasoning and the irreversible argument which are the main errors.
	www.mathpath.org /proof/argument.invalid.htm (754 words)

	Logical Fallacies and the Art of Debate
		That kind of response is fine, except that the original argument still remains in the debate, albeit in a less persuasive form, and the opposition is free to mount a rhetorical offensive saying why it's important after all.
		This is the familiar argument that some policy, behavior, or practice is right or acceptable because "it's always been done that way." This is an extremely popular fallacy in debate rounds; for example, "Every great civilization in history has provided state subsidies for art and culture!" But that fact does not justify continuing the policy.
		Circular argumentation occurs when someone uses what they are trying to prove as part of the proof of that thing.
	www.csun.edu /~dgw61315/fallacies.html (5262 words)

	fallacies
		Straw man arguments are fallacious, since if you merely show that a simplified version of the opposing view is absurd, it of course doesn’t follow that the more sophisticated version of the view is absurd.
		The rule of thumb is that someone is a legitimate authority to the extent that she is in a better position than “the person on the street” to discern the truth of the matter.
		(In a circular argument, if all the premises are true, then trivially, the conclusion is true as well since the conclusion is included among the premises.) Nevertheless, circular arguments are still fallacious because they are ineffective in proving their conclusions.
	www.unc.edu /~tparent/fallacies.htm (1105 words)

	Circular
		Circularity occurs when thinking is confined to only one of these.
		Instead of the negative attitude, sometimes justified on formal logical grounds that this is a circular argument, it can be taken as implying that the Quran is exactly as it should be, and as it was meant to be and in accord with whatever circumstances affected it.
		You wrote:- "What seems a circular argument to one person is not so to another." Of course, everyone is entitled to express an opinion, make idiosyncratic assumptions, or interpretations, about the 'circular reasoning' conceptual device.
	www.altway.freeuk.com /Answers/540-Circular.htm (2847 words)

	Logical Fallacy: Begging the Question
		Any form of argument in which the conclusion occurs as one of the premisses, or a chain of arguments in which the final conclusion is a premiss of one of the earlier arguments in the chain.
		First of all, not all circular reasoning is fallacious.
		Any viciously circular argument is one which attempts to infer a conclusion based ultimately upon that conclusion itself.
	www.fallacyfiles.org /begquest.html (572 words)

	Begging the question - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		Such an argument is valid in the sense in which logicians use that term, yet provides no reason at all to believe its conclusion.
		All circular arguments have this characteristic: that the proposition to be proved is assumed at some point in the argument.
		That is, if you follow a chain of arguments, the conclusion of some argument is used as a premise in one of the earlier arguments that eventually led to that conclusion.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Circular_argument (1028 words)

	Brainstorms: Explanations by Design
		The circularity that RBH describes is a consequence of using in tandem the argument-from-design and the argument-to-design.
		RBH’s point is that if you base your argument on the hypothesis that the designer(s) would use similar plans in different situations, but the only evidence you have for such a hypothesis is that in fact we see similar plans in different situations, then you have engaged in circular reasoning.
		Wells claims that homology is used in a circular fashion by biologists because textbooks define homology as similarity inherited from a common ancestor, and then state that homology is evidence for common ancestry.
	www.iscid.org /boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000405.html (3195 words)

	Errors involving invalid uses of generalizations
		All logical forms have one thing in common: the truth or falsity of the arguments which are fed to them must arise from outside of logic.
		Thus, in the classical syllogism previously stated, the argument "All men are mortal" came not from the forms of logic, but from the experience of some philosophers.
		Unfortunately, both of these approaches render circular and fallacious the generalization that "all" instances of Sprit baptism in the New Testament were accompanied by speaking in tongues...
	www.angelfire.com /ks2/fallacies/fallgen.htm (1384 words)

	ENTHYMEME
		Circular reasoning (also called a tautological argument) may occur in both the positive and negative form.
		It is also circular if the reason is a statement which is the negative of the opposite of the assertion.
		Example of a circular argument in the positive: Bike laws are too strict because they are rigid and prohibitive.
	www.csuchico.edu /~pkittle/110/enthymeme.html (1142 words)

	Tricks and Fallacies
		Also, the facts could be used at any point to demolish arguments about genetic bases of intelligence, crime, and so on.
		Its argument is a perfect example of shifting the goalposts.
		One of my favorite applications of this is to ask, in the middle of any argument, about any subject, "What about the children?" This is sure to gain you the moral high ground.
	www.zmag.org /instructionals/logstats/logstats5.htm (856 words)

	Logical Fallacies .info - Fallacies of Presumption - Begging the Question / Circularity
		A circular argument fails as a proof because it will only be judged to be sound by those who already accept its conclusion.
		Anyone who rejects the argument’s conclusion should also reject at least one of its premises (the one that is the same as its conclusion), and so should reject the argument as a whole.
		Typical examples of circular arguments include rights-claims: e.g., “I have a right to say what I want, therefore you shouldn’t try to silence me”; “Women have a right to choose whether to have an abortion or not, therefore abortion should be allowed”; “The unborn has a right to life, therefore abortion is immoral”.
	www.logicalfallacies.info /beggingthequestion.html (308 words)

	Is the Bible evidence for Christianity?
		Inerrantism or infallibilism would not follow just from that, at least not in a way that could be shown convincingly and easily (though I think once you admit God’s hand in it, the inerrantist or infallibilist has her foot in the door, but I’ll leave that thought for another time).
		All this together shows a unity of theme and purpose to all scripture, despite all the different perspectives involved from different walks of life, different cultural settings, different situations with respect to who is politically in charge, and different stages of the development of the ritual system of worship in ancient Israel.
		This is a pretty elaborate argument, and people aren't always going to sit down and read or listen to something like this, but much of this is necessary to understand why Christians believe this stuff.
	web.syr.edu /~jrpierce/Bible.htm (3237 words)

	Petitio Principii
		Abstract: Petitio principii (circular) argument is described and several examples are noted.
		Petitio Principii: (circular reasoning, circular argument, begging the question) in general, the fallacy of assuming as a premiss a statement which has the same meaning as the conclusion.
		Generally, such an argument would not be misleading and would only be given in unusual circumstances, e.g., the speaker is very tired, talking to a child, or talking to a subordinate.
	philosophy.lander.edu /logic/circular.html (825 words)

	Nanson roasts
		Here is Nanson's main problem, which also seemed to be the problem for RH and others: they mistake the circularity of a specific argument for the circularity of an entire epistemological system.
		Clearly, there is a logical force behind the latter two which is absent from the previous circular argument.
		If you think all arguments are circular, that they are all of equal value, then you cannot argue that anyone else is incorrect, since everyone follows the same system which you do.
	www.errantyears.com /1996/old/000213.html (793 words)

	Regress argument - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		The Regress Argument (also known as The Problem of Criterion and the diallelus) is a problem in epistemology and, in general, a problem in any situation where a statement has to be justified.
		The argument is usually attributed to Sextus Empiricus, and has been restated by Agrippa as part of what has become known as "Agrippa's Trilemma".
		In this case, the justification of any statement is used, after a long chain of reasoning, in justifying itself, and the argument is circular.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Regress_argument (1539 words)

	'Circular Arguments' from 'Clear Thinking' (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-12)
		A Circular Argument is still another form of begging the question, although it is usually considered separately.
		Later on in the argument, when your opponent expresses his doubt as to the authenticity of F 's Diary or its trustworthiness as a source of evidence, you say, perhaps not in these words, that it must be reliable and authentic because it contains the information you have already quoted.
		When the circular argument is expressed in simple and unmistakable language, with the intervening discussion omitted, it is easy enough to detect, and you might justly say that no one in his senses would ever be deceived.
	www.ourcivilisation.com /smartboard/shop/jepsonrw/chap95.htm (340 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)