Circular reasoning (also known as paradoxical thinking, circular argument, circular cause and consequence, reasoning in a circle, vicious circle), means, when you attempt to make an argument by beginning with an assumption that what you are trying to prove is already true, creating a circle in reasoning where no useful information is being shared.
Hence, circular reasoning is when you attempt to make an argument by beginning with an assumption that what you are trying to prove is already true. In your premise, you already accept the truth of the claim you are attempting to make.
Circular reasoning fallacy can be a great way of convincing an audience who are already of the belief that the claim being made is true and so is often used to target these types of audience. However, if the audience does not already believe the claim then circular reasoning is simply not as effective.
Also, circular reasoning is a type of argument in which the conclusion comes back to the premise without providing any outside proof, meaning both sides of the argument are making the same point. By using its own conclusion as a premise, the statement doesn’t offer any type of proof–instead, it declares the conclusion in another form, consequently asking the listener to accept it as being true without any evidential claims.
Example
Circular reasoning is often brought up in religion because people’s beliefs are based on…beliefs. One common religious argument that falls into the category of circular reasoning is that the sacred book of any religion is true, so you shouldn’t doubt it.
A few more examples as statements are given below.
>Iceland is the best country to live because it is the best country
>The new book by Stephen King is very well written because he is such a good writer.
>Everyone at school loves Amy because she is so popular.