The idea that circular reasoning is bad is widespread. However, this reputation is undeserved. While circular reasoning should not be convincing (at least not usually), it should also not be considered invalid.

Circular Reasoning is Valid

The first important thing to note is that circular reasoning is logically valid. A implies A. If circular arguments are to be critiqued, it must be by some other standard than logical validity.

I think it's fair to say that the most relevant objection to circular arguments is that they are not very good at convincing someone who does not already accept the conclusion. You are talking to another person, and need to think about communicating with their perspective. Perhaps the reason circular arguments are a common 'problem' is because they are valid. People naturally think about what should be a convincing argument from their own perspective, rather than the other person's.

---

Outline:

(00:18) Circular Reasoning is Valid

(03:08) Circular Arguments as Positive Evidence

(04:17) Inevitable Circularity

(07:36) But then what do you say to Bob?

(08:22) Dont Double Count

(09:40) Reflective Loops

(14:44) Conclusion

The original text contained 9 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:
August 5th, 2024

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/8yuQua2hgSiowv6qp/circular-reasoning

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“Circular Reasoning” by abramdemski

LessWrong (30+ Karma)