Circular Reasoning: Etymology, Literal and Conceptual Meanings
Etymology
The term “Circular Reasoning” derives from the Latin word “circulus,” meaning circle or circuit, and “ratio,” meaning reason. This etymology reflects the inherent nature of the concept, which involves a logical fallacy where the conclusion of an argument is inherently presupposed by its premises, creating a circular and self-referential structure.
Literal Meaning
In a literal sense, “Circular Reasoning” refers to the logical fallacy wherein the argument’s conclusion is restated in one of its premises, resulting in a circular and tautological structure. This form of reasoning fails to provide meaningful evidence or support for the conclusion and instead relies on a self-referential loop that lacks substantive logical progression.
Conceptual Meaning
Conceptually, “Circular Reasoning” extends beyond the specific instances of logical fallacies and encompasses a broader critique of reasoning processes that lack foundational coherence. It highlights the inherent flaw in arguments where the premises merely restate or assume the truth of the conclusion without offering external evidence, thereby hindering the pursuit of valid and sound logical deductions.
In short, the term “Circular Reasoning” encompasses the following:
- Etymology: The term originates from Latin, combining “circulus” (circle) and “ratio” (reason).
- Literal Meaning: Refers to the logical fallacy where the argument’s conclusion is restated in its premises, creating a circular and tautological structure.
- Conceptual Meaning: Critiques reasoning processes lacking foundational coherence, emphasizing the need for valid and sound logical deductions.
Circular Reasoning: Definition as a Rhetorical Device
“Circular Reasoning” operates as a rhetorical device characterized by the logical fallacy of presenting an argument whose conclusion is assumed in one of its premises. This circular and self-referential structure creates an illusion of validity without offering substantive evidence or logical progression. As a rhetorical strategy, it undermines the integrity of logical discourse by perpetuating a closed loop of reasoning that fails to contribute meaningful support to the argument’s conclusion.
Circular Reasoning: Types and Examples
| Type of Circular Reasoning | Description | Example |
| Circular Definition | Defining a term using the term itself or a synonym. | Example: “The paranormal is that which cannot be explained by science.” |
| Circular Reference | Supporting a claim by referring to the claim itself. | Example: “This drug is effective because it cures illnesses.” |
| Circular Cause and Consequence | Assuming the consequence as the cause or vice versa. | Example: “He is rich because he has a lot of money.” |
| Circular Proof | Using the conclusion as part of the evidence. | Example: “God exists because the Bible says so, and the Bible is the word of God.” |
| Circular Analogy | Employing an analogy that is synonymous with the argument. | Example: “This plan will succeed because it’s like a well-thought-out success.” |
These examples illustrate instances where the reasoning relies on a circular structure, creating an illusion of validity without offering external support or logical progression.
Circular Reasoning: Examples in Everyday Life
1. Circular Definition:
- Example: “Honesty is the quality of being truthful and not deceitful.” In this case, the definition uses synonyms that do not provide distinct meaning, creating a circular reference.
2. Circular Reference:
- Example: “I trust her because she never lies, and I know she never lies because she is a trustworthy person.” The trustworthiness is assumed without external validation, creating a circular reference.
3. Circular Cause and Consequence:
- Example: “He must be guilty because only a guilty person would act so suspiciously. His suspicious behavior proves his guilt.” Here, the assumption of guilt is based on the very behavior that is said to prove it.
4. Circular Proof:
- Example: “The theory is correct because it’s written in this official document, and the document is official because it contains the correct theory.” The argument relies on the document’s authority, which is itself contingent on the theory being correct.
5. Circular Analogy:
- Example: “This approach is effective because it mimics the successful strategy, and the successful strategy is effective because it follows this approach.” The circular analogy assumes effectiveness without external validation.
6. Circular Justification:
- Example: “He deserves the promotion because he has been in the company the longest, and being in the company the longest makes him the most deserving of a promotion.” The justification for promotion is circular, relying solely on seniority.
7. Circular Quoting:
- Example: “The article is reliable because it quotes an expert, and the expert’s opinion is trustworthy because it’s cited in this reliable article.” The circularity arises from relying on the article’s reliability to vouch for the expert’s credibility.
8. Circular Assumption:
- Example: “God exists because the Bible says so, and we can trust the Bible because it is the word of God.” The assumption of God’s existence relies on the premise that the Bible is divinely inspired.
9. Circular Comparison:
- Example: “This car is superior because it outperforms others, and it outperforms others because it is a superior vehicle.” The circularity arises from using the conclusion to support the initial premise.
10. Circular Validation:
- Example: “The survey results are accurate because they agree with what people believe, and what people believe is validated by the survey results.” The circular validation assumes accuracy without independent verification.
Circular Reasoning in Literature: Suggested Readings
- Aristotle. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. Translated by George A. Kennedy, Oxford UP, 2007.
- Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, and Joseph M. Williams. The Craft of Research. 4th ed., University of Chicago Press, 2016.
- Graff, Gerald, and Cathy Birkenstein. They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing. 3rd ed., W. W. Norton & Company, 2014.
- Heinrichs, Jay. Thank You for Arguing: What Aristotle, Lincoln, and Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion. 3rd ed., Three Rivers Press, 2017.
- Lanham, Richard A. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. 2nd ed., University of California Press, 1991.
- Lunsford, Andrea A., John J. Ruszkiewicz, and Keith Walters. Everything’s an Argument with Readings. 8th ed., Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2019.
- Perelman, Chaim, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Translated by John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver, University of Notre Dame Press, 1969.
- Strunk, William, and E. B. White. The Elements of Style. 4th ed., Pearson, 1999.
