Simply put, in circular reasoning, the premise assumes that the conclusion is already true. If you want to prove the conclusion, look to the premise. Don’t believe the premise? Look to the conclusion. Don’t believe the conclusion? Look to the premise…
Example of circular reasoning
In logical form:
Premise: There is a page on this site that says everything on this site is true.
Conclusion: Everything on this site is true.
Why it’s wrong
That little bit in bold up there – where you have to look at the conclusion to see if the premise is true is the problem. We have a premise that makes an assertion, but why should be believe that the premise supports the conclusion? Because the conclusion says that it does.
Nothing is actually introduced here. We have simply said that our conclusion is true because our conclusion supports something that says it’s true.
God, that sentence was repetitive.