Circular Reasoning
What is Circular Reasoning?
“He can’t be lying—he says he never lies.” That sounds like a reason, but it merely goes in a circle. It starts by treating him as trustworthy, then replaces that with “he says he’s trustworthy.” No new evidence has been offered that someone who is not already convinced would have to accept. A reason is supposed to change the mind of someone who does not yet accept the conclusion. If the reason works only after the conclusion has been accepted, or simply restates the conclusion in different words, it proves nothing. That is circular reasoning.
Circular Reasoning: common mistakes and how to handle them
Someone in a family group chat says, “That wellness influencer must be telling the truth; he never lies.” When asked how they know, they reply, “He says so in his own videos.” The influencer’s credibility is being guaranteed by the influencer himself. In a staff meeting, someone declares, “Let’s choose this proposal because it’s the best of the options.” Asked what makes it the best, they answer, “Because the other options aren’t as good.” The explanation just repeats the original claim. When a child asks why bedtime has to be 9 p.m., a parent says, “Because the rule says bedtime is 9 p.m.” Asked why the rule was set that way, the parent replies, “Because 9 p.m. is when children should go to bed.” The problem is the same in every case: the conclusion itself, or a claim that depends on accepting the conclusion, is being used as the reason.
What the Circular Reasoning questions test
whether the reason is really the same claim as the conclusion, whether the reason can stand without first believing the conclusion, whether a statement supplies genuinely new evidence or merely goes round in circles, and whether the circular argument is contained in one sentence or unfolds across several rounds of questioning. The questions often draw on family conversations, office discussions, group chats, and everyday shopping decisions.