Circular Reasoning

Circular reasoning uses the conclusion itself as support for that same conclusion. The premises may be reworded, but they provide no independent reason to accept the claim. Breaking the circle requires evidence that remains valid without assuming the conclusion.

Repeating the conclusion as its own proof.

What It Means

Circular reasoning assumes the conclusion within its premises, often by restating the same idea in different words.

Because no independent support enters the loop, someone who doubts the conclusion receives no reason to accept it.

Common Signals

The explanation repeats the claim with synonyms instead of adding evidence.
When asked “Why?”, the answer eventually returns to the starting assertion.
A key premise can only be accepted if the conclusion is already assumed to be true.
Requests for independent support are answered by insisting that the claim is self-evident.

How to Respond

Write the premises and conclusion separately and check whether they say the same thing.
Ask for evidence that could be evaluated without first accepting the conclusion.
Rebuild the argument from independently supported premises.