No. The circularity does not reduce the validity of these
arguments in any way. That is, there is nothing inherently wrong with
circular argument, although this does not mean that
all circular arguments are valid and/or sound. It should be more clear now that this line of
reasoning is perfectly valid.Aug 18, 2017
Circular arguments are perfectly valid - THE SKEPTICAL SCIENTIST Why is circular reasoning bad?
Circular arguments are perfectly valid
18th August 2017 by
Tim van der Zee
You have likely heard the claim that circular arguments are wrong or incoherent. In this short post I will outline why this is
not the case. Circular arguments are perfectly fine; in fact, they can be quite convincing!
Let’s start with perhaps the most famous bad example of a circular argument:
God exists because the bible says so, and the bible is true because God exists.
It is clear that this is circular, as each statement depends on the other to be true. It’s also a bad argument from a logical standpoint, as logical arguments tend to be formulated in “if A than B”, and this formulation is missing here. This emphasizes the other weak aspect of this argumentation: both claims have a rather low prior probability.
Let’s see what happens when we rephrase the above argument to the following:
If the bible is true God exists, and, if God exists the bible is true.
While both claims still have the same very low probability, it is now a more coherent – albeit circular – line of reasoning. Is there anything wrong with these arguments
because they are circular? No.
The circularity does not reduce the validity of these arguments in any way. That is, there is nothing inherently wrong with circular argument, although this does not mean that
all circular arguments are valid and/or sound.
http://www.timvanderzee.com/circular-arguments/
Circular reasoning is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because
if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. Wikipedia
Circular reasoning (
Latin:
circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as
circular logic) is a
logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with.
[1] The components of a circular argument are often logically
valid because
if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning