Circular Reasoning Fallacy
Also known as: Begging the Question, Petitio Principii, Circular Logic
What is Circular Reasoning?
Circular reasoning occurs when the conclusion of an argument is used as one of its own premises. Rather than providing independent evidence to support the claim, the argument assumes the truth of what it is trying to prove. The reasoning goes in a circle: the conclusion supports the premise, and the premise supports the conclusion, without any external evidence entering the loop.
Example
A discussion about whether a particular news source is reliable.
“This news source is trustworthy because it only publishes accurate stories. How do we know the stories are accurate? Because they come from a trustworthy source.”
The argument that the source is trustworthy is supported by the claim that its stories are accurate, which is in turn supported by the claim that the source is trustworthy. The reasoning is circular — no independent evidence is offered.
How to Spot It
- The conclusion is essentially a restatement of one of the premises.
- No new evidence is introduced — the argument just circles back to its starting point.
- If you remove the conclusion, the premise no longer has independent support.
- The argument 'feels right' but does not actually advance understanding when examined.
How to Counter It
- Ask for independent evidence that does not rely on the conclusion being true.
- Rephrase the argument to expose the circularity: 'You're saying X because of Y, but Y is just X restated.'
- Request external sources, data, or reasoning that support the premise without assuming the conclusion.
- Point out that the argument needs an entry point — some evidence that is not itself the thing being proven.
Related Fallacies
Check your arguments for logical fallacies
Try the Fallacy Checker