Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Is circular reasoning always fallacious?

Dazz
Posts: 1,163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2014 12:00:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Circular reasoning isn't fallacious if it's not arbitrary and with special cases where to use circular reasoning is inevitable like when proving the laws of logic to form an argument itself.

Hence if there're other cases too, when begging the question or any logical fallacy isn't considered a fallacy, what're those?
Remove the "I want", remainder is the "peace". ~Al-Ghazali~
"This time will also pass", a dose to cure both; the excitement & the grievance. ~Ayaz~
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2014 12:28:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/22/2014 12:00:48 PM, Dazz wrote:
Circular reasoning isn't fallacious if it's not arbitrary and with special cases where to use circular reasoning is inevitable like when proving the laws of logic to form an argument itself.

Hence if there're other cases too, when begging the question or any logical fallacy isn't considered a fallacy, what're those?

Well, there is a fallacy of composition, but that is not always a fallacy.

For example, if every part of a wall is brick, we can say the whole wall is brick. However, just because every part is a certain size, doesn't mean the whole is a certain size. Something reasoning from the part to whole works, sometimes it does not.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2014 4:00:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
All (valid) reasoning is circular. Circular reasoning only becomes fallacious when non-universal premises are integrated in a way that is crucial to the conclusion.

"...The fact that any reasonable definition of "absolute truth" amounts to tautology can be shown by reversing this reasoning. Since absolute truth must be universal, it is always true regardless of the truth values of its variables (where the variables actually represent objects and systems for which specific state-descriptions vary in space and time with respect to truth value). Moreover, it falls within its own scope and is thus
self-referential. By virtue of its universality and self-reference, it is a universal element of reality syntax, the set of structural and functional rules governing the spatial structure and temporal evolution of reality. As such, it must be unfalsifiable, any supposition of its falsehood leading directly to a reductio ad absurdum. And to ice the cake, it is unavoidably implicated in its own justification; were it ever to be violated, theT/F boundary would be disrupted, and this would prevent it (or anything else) from being proven. Therefore, it is an active constraint in its own proof, and thus possesses all the characteristics of a tautology." http://www.scribd.com...
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2014 7:25:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/22/2014 12:00:48 PM, Dazz wrote:
Circular reasoning isn't fallacious if it's not arbitrary and with special cases where to use circular reasoning is inevitable like when proving the laws of logic to form an argument itself.

Hence if there're other cases too, when begging the question or any logical fallacy isn't considered a fallacy, what're those?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12