Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; [1] also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. [2] Circular reasoning is not a formal logical fallacy, but a pragmatic defect in an argument whereby the premises are just as much in need of proof or ...
The Cartesian circle (also known as Arnauld's circle [1]) is an example of fallacious circular reasoning attributed to French philosopher René Descartes. He argued that the existence of God is proven by reliable perception, which is itself guaranteed by God.
Closely connected with begging the question is the fallacy of circular reasoning (circulus in probando), a fallacy in which the reasoner begins with the conclusion. [26] The individual components of a circular argument can be logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true, and does not lack relevance. However ...
Circular reasoning (circulus in demonstrando) – the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end up with (e.g.: all bachelors are unmarried males). Fallacy of many questions (complex question, fallacy of presuppositions, loaded question, plurium interrogationum ) – someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been ...
A circular definition is a type of definition that uses the term(s) being defined as part of the description or assumes that the term(s) being described are already known. There are several kinds of circular definition, and several ways of characterising the term: pragmatic , lexicographic and linguistic .
Assuming the conclusion of an argument, a kind of circular reasoning, also called "begging the question" (petitio principii) Making jumps in logic (non sequitur) Identifying a false cause and effect (post hoc ergo propter hoc) Asserting that everyone agrees (argumentum ad populum, bandwagoning)
Revision theory is a subfield of philosophical logic.It consists of a general theory of definitions, including (but not limited to) circular and interdependent concepts.A circular definition is one in which the concept being defined occurs in the statement defining it—for example, defining a G as being blue and to the left of a G. Revision theory provides formal semantics for defined ...
Circular definition is a type of self-reference in which the definition of a term or concept includes the term or concept itself, either explicitly or implicitly. Circular definitions are considered fallacious because they only define a term in terms of itself. [ 11 ]