0:06

the in this video we're going to look at the fallacy as circular arguments
0:18
which is something different than begging the question will talk about
0:20
that in just a moment
0:22
I'm and we're going to eight main things will talk about what circular argument
0:26
is
0:27
will look at the argument structure be circular of course
0:31
I will talk about why it's a fallacy will
0:34
examine some common situations in which you can expect to see a rise in a row in
0:39
which case is you want to be on your guard
0:40
then we'll I'll take a look at three examples
0:44
on the fallacy I'm will go over some guidelines about how to spot it what to
0:49
be on guard for
0:50
for those you her students we will talk about how not to mix this fallacy up
0:55
with certain other fallacies with which it has some similarities
0:58
and then finally will talk about how you as a critical thinker can avoid falling
1:04
into this palace E
1:05
in your own reasoning inquiry argumentation
1:09
and life so what is a circular
1:12
argument I'm in some textbooks I need to point out
1:16
this is brought under the heading %uh begging the question
1:19
are here I'm going to say that that's a little bit sloppy that's a little less
1:23
rigorous than we wanna be
1:25
because they're not quite the same in terms of their structure they do have a
1:29
lot of similarities
1:30
by I think that we want to use a different name for this is called
1:33
circular argument I'm
1:35
sometimes is called circular Sumter bondo I catch 22 when somebody talks
1:40
with a catch-22
1:42
quite locked in that can be an example the circular argument although sometimes
1:46
it could also be a dilemma and we want to talk about

1:49
how those are different circular reasoning or when somebody talks about a
1:53
vicious
1:54
circle were often dealing with this kind of LC
1:57
now what makes it a I'm
2:01
circular argument at least one other premises
2:04
not all the premises necessarily but at least one other promises that is being
2:08
provided in order to support
2:10
or justify the claim in the conclusion turns out
2:14
in some way to be dependent on the conclusion itself
2:18
so you need the primacy is to establish a conclusion but you need the conclusion
2:23
in some way to establish
2:24
at
2:25
least wanna the promises let's look at the structure that now
2:28
so with we begin with the promise that claim why
2:32
is true and then that's going to lead us to have in some way of claim why is tru
e
2:37
then claim
2:38
axis true however what's being repressed in here is that claim why
2:43
is true precisely because clay max is true
2:47
there's the circularity and that mean a leading to the conclusion that claim
2:52
axis true
2:53
it doesn't really fall unless you grant claim max
2:58
in the first place which is not what you're supposed to be doing sense it's
3:01
an
3:01
argued for conclusion on 31 depicted graphically can be done very simply
3:07
we know we're saying claim why is true and then
3:10
if claim I is true climax is true and that should lead to claim X being true
3:14
but we see that you know you see the a row showing
3:18
that claim axes feeling back in the claim why and that's part of what
3:22
supporting claim why in the first place
3:24

so what's wrong with us well it's pretty easy to see

3:28
why this is not a good form argumentation
3:32
the claim that's being argued for his inclusion
3:35
is being supported by premises which in turn require the conclusion to be true
3:40
or accepted in order for those primacy is to be true or accepted
3:45
right there's again at circularity the are the structure is circular
3:49
providing no reason why you should accept the premise ease in the first
3:54
place
3:54
so if you're not going to get somebody to accept the promises are not can
3:58
accept the conclusion
3:59
I'm I should actually talk about you know this is being an example of
4:03
preaching to the choir would be another synonym that we could talk about
4:06
argument so this store I do want to point out
4:09
can sometimes have a complicated structure which conceals the fact
4:14
that some other primacy is are dependent upon the conclusion
4:18
so you know you can be taken in by at a little bit more
4:22
easily when there's a lot of different privacy is a play
4:25
but all it takes is for one other promises
4:28
to be dependent in some way upon the conclusion in order for that promise to
4:32
be acceptable are true
4:34
in order for you to have a circular argued
4:37
now what are some common situations in which you might see this current I'm
4:43
like it but here the fallacy occurs commonly when we're discussing matters
4:46
that are controversial
4:48
where the person who's making the argument assumes
4:52
an agreement on the audience is part to the primacy is its actually
4:57
lacking sometimes on the basis of common sense sometimes on
5:01
in on bases belong to they presume it community a.m. in career
5:04
interest ur something along those lines so it occurs in a wide variety of
5:09
contexts summer these include personal relationships
5:12

and conflicts you know you untangle on

5:15
arguments between between spouses or boyfriends and girlfriends or
5:20
you know friends or whatever and you often will find circular argumentation
5:25
being
5:26
smuggled in there I'm marketing and advertising why should you buy this
5:31
product well because you want this and that leads to this and then that goes to
5:36
the stretch
5:36
your constructing some promises but then that turns out that the whole thing is
5:40
dependent on you buying the product in the first place
5:43
I'm politics and policy making
5:46
was a lot on bootstrapping as we call it going on with argumentation
5:52
in those arenas I economics
5:55
%uh education religion these are all
5:59
areas where we can sometimes find circular reasoning going on particularly
6:03
when somebody's got a pet theory
6:05
that they want to use to you know lead to some sort of conclusion
6:09
it turns out that the conclusion is actually required in order for all the
6:14
primacy is to work
6:15
%ah that there's been some you know importation going on there
6:19
I'm medicine and psychotherapy you know diagnostic sometimes why did you
6:23
diagnose things that way
6:25
on sometimes there can be circular reasoning involved in the apt he and
6:29
in discussion at the static matters you know when we're appealing to things like
6:32
the beautiful
6:33
on the aesthetically pleasing the ugly what makes it so
6:37
well sometimes it turns out that is you now there's a circularity involved in
6:41
those as well
6:42
let's look at some interesting examples
6:45
now so
6:47
this is one that I hope that you're not familiar with from experience
6:51

but unfortunately many of our younger people and also many amor
6:55
older people artwork are running into this today
6:59
the conclusion as we can't hire you at this for
7:02
why well in order to be heard at this firm we'd need to see that you have
7:07
extensive experience in training in the field
7:09
not those on that they had a right however the training and experience in
7:14
our field would have to be acquired by you
7:16
for working for several years and are for that's not possible
7:21
because you know I'm you would have to actually have
7:24
I'm hired by the firm so what they're saying is the reason we can't hire you
7:29
is because we haven't hired you apec asked right
7:33
on with that sorta actually comes down to a few map it out
7:38
this is in fact a circular argument I'm
7:42
now that's not gonna do you any good when you go into the office said look
7:45
you're making a circular argument please give me a job
7:48
but it's nice to know at least that's what the conditions
7:51
here's another classic rock you see this in a lot of logic text books
7:56
and you know for religious believers I am NOT actually saying here that the
8:01
Bible
8:01
can't be true or that God doesn't exist regattas is
8:05
you know false or anything like that not I'm
8:08
what i'm saying is this is a circular argument this is not a good way to argue
8:12
your case
8:13
on ATS by the way have their own sort of things like this
8:16
so here's here's how the argument goes reno
8:19
that God exists and is entirely truthful in all matters upon which he
8:23
communicates with human beings
8:25
the Bible is God's Word provided to human beings
8:28
therefore the Bible is completely true in all respects
8:31
sounds good until you say you have to wait a second how do we know God exists
8:36

for God is true and then so is as well

8:38
look it says he raped the book in your with the book that you want me to say is
8:42
completely true
8:43
and there's the problem there is the circularity
8:47
right on the bible's true because in some way God was involved in the writing
8:51
process
8:52
how do you know that God is involved in the writing process
8:55
I'm well because it's inferred from something that local
8:59
anytime you doing this sort of thing you've got a circular argument if you
9:03
can bring in something from the outside you could probably shoring up
9:06
now here's my favorite one
9:09
this is actually from the book catch-22
9:13
from which we get the the term catch-22
9:16
is the circular form there's other ways to chat parse this out so it becomes
9:21
something like
9:22
a a dilemma in step but the circular form goals like this
9:27
the conclusion is you ever seen and you must fly the combat missions which are
9:32
dangerous right
9:33
so here's the the way the reasoning goes you claim you're crazy and therefore
9:37
should be grounded so that you don't fly any combat missions
9:40
but you'd have to be crazy to be unconcerned about flying anymore these
9:45
dangerous combat missions
9:46
but being concerned about your own safety in the face a
9:50
dangers is assigned a possessing a rational mind so a person
9:54
possessing a rational mind is saying soho
9:58
you must fly the combat missions that you don't wanna fly
10:02
that are driving you crazy that are scaring the hell happened here trash
10:06
and I'm what's being assumed in the first place is you have to fly combat
10:09
missions
10:10
that's why you're having this this fear response
10:14

which shows you the same which means you have to fly the combat missions it sits
10:17
at chicken egg thing over and over and over again right
10:20
so how do you spot this
10:23
well when you're considering in arguments that somebody else is making
10:28
examine the promises to see whether they contain anything assume to be true
10:32
that is actually in some way being supplied by assuming the conclusion to
10:37
be true if that's the case you have a circular arguments most likely
10:40
be on guard i think is an important piece of advice
10:45
when dealing with certain kinds of people or organizations
10:48
that which ones those that have a relatively coherent complex but
10:52
controversial perspective
10:54
in whose arguments one is likely to encounter substantive assumptions being
10:59
made that's not to say that everybody like that is going to make
11:02
a circular argument but those are the cases where it's more likely to be made
11:07
because
11:07
big assumptions being made and oftentimes those accounts
11:11
you know all the different parts are connected up with each other so when
11:14
someone is trying to explain why should we believe this
11:16
circular argumentation can creep in there also keep in mind there can be
11:22
cases where both the promise
11:24
primacy is sorry am a conclusion
11:27
are indeed true bought where the structure of the
11:31
argument is circular if the argument is a circular argument you don't want to
11:37
accept it
11:38
as an argument that doesn't mean that you can't accept the claims in the
11:41
argument
11:42
but you should accept them for some other reason right there should be
11:45
another basis for that
11:47
when you are
11:50
I am a student who has to distinguish between this and other
11:54

types is on fallacious arguments were the ones you have to be on the lookout
11:58
for
11:59
it was really just took sometimes it might be confused with the false to
12:04
LaFell see
12:05
right in the false dilemma fallacy you're actually saying
12:08
look you you don't want a and you don't want be
12:12
but there is no see so you know you're kinda screwed
12:16
or you're saying well you know you don't want a
12:19
on there is no other alternative so you have to have be I'm
12:23
he has a similar kind of structure in certain ways but it actually has a
12:28
different structure if you map it out
12:31
why does this get mixed up with the circular argument will think about the
12:35
catch-22
12:36
in the catch-twenty really do have a circular structure to the argument but
12:41
it's being posed as if it is a dilemma look either you're crazy you're you're
12:45
saying
12:46
you crazy me not to care for flying if your same
12:49
well then you gotta fly the mission anyway right I'm
12:53
the other thing you wanna watch out for
12:57
and again is no I don't want anyone did end up getting bad grades or something
13:01
like that because a the tangled with your instructor
13:04
if your instructor is actually telling you no circular argument is begging the
13:08
question
13:09
okay it for the purposes of your class go with your instructor
13:12
because it's just a great right
13:14
and then after you get outta class a while back I was wrong for that lady was
13:17
wrong
13:18
and now I'm gonna be more rigorous in my my analysis of arguments
13:22
begging the question is a little bit different than circular argumentation
13:26
but they are easy to mix up because
13:29

on in both cases the premises and conclusions are are connected up

13:33
in weird ways in one case there's a circularity to it
13:36
in the other case you're basically just repeating the same thing from promised a
13:39
conclusion
13:40
one other thing I do wanna say not every case where there appears to be some sor
t
13:45
of circularity involved
13:47
in between the premises and conclusions is necessarily the circular
13:51
argumentation fallacy
13:52
yet to show that there's a circular argument there you gotta show
13:56
that unless this conclusion is granted you're not going to get the prophecies
14:01
on holding or you don't have a circular argument now
14:05
how do you avoid falling into this fallacy yourself and and inflicting upon
14:09
other people
14:10
well you know one thing you can do is make sure
14:14
when you are engaging in in argumentation trying to make a case
14:19
the grounds that you're providing in the promises the things are you using
14:23
argue for the conclusion are not actually assuming something that's built
14:27
into the conclusion
14:29
so you not smuggling the conclusion into the premises
14:32
you know you will sometimes end up doing
14:36
stress so if you do discover yourself engaged in since circular argument
14:40
see if you can make it non circular see if you can improve the argument see if
14:44
you can provide some further grounds besides what's contained
14:47
in the conclusion that you can use to support your promises then
14:51
its it's not could be a problem on sense we generally
14:56
want to show conclusions to be true because we
14:59
already do think them to be true you want to be on guard you wanna
15:04
you wanna I'm not make assumptions like that when you're trying to make a case
15:08
to other people
15:10
who don't necessarily share her all over your assumptions already or else he

15:14
wouldn't make
15:15
arguments right so be on guard against against temptations
15:18
to us soon their audience will grant you what the conclusion is providing
15:24
you want to try to prove the conclusion independently
15:27
on however you feel about that's part of being a good critical thinker
15:32
last thing I need to say about this is this video is part
15:36
%uh the entire series on the fallacies in
15:39
a much larger channel devoted to logic argumentation and critical thinking
15:44
so if you enjoy this video if you find it useful if you think it's valuable
15:48
resource for other people share it with them
15:50
I talk about it try to apply this in your own life
15:54
in keep coming back to the channel because we're gonna be constantly
15:57
uploading new content
15:58
and there's a lot of all content already accumulating in there
16:02
lot a great stuff on the fallacies and and many other topics in these areas
16:14
the