PSYCHOLOGY | CRITICAL THINKING | BULLETPROOF
How To Bullet-proof Your Reasoning #4: Watch Out For Circular Arguments!
Don’t be misled by arguments where the premise includes the conclusion
The goal of this How To Bullet-proof Your Reasoning series is to equip the reader with a better understanding of how to use critical thinking in daily life. Today we examine what it means to be Begging The Question (making a circular argument).
You must know how to recognize this bad argumentation logic when you encounter it so as to avoid people accidentally or intentionally (mis)leading you to believe something that is incorrect, untrue, or otherwise unproven.
UNDERSTANDING WHAT “BEGGING THE QUESTION (MAKING A CIRCULAR ARGUMENT)” IS
Begging the question: an informal* logical fallacy where the conclusion portion of an argument is assumed to be true by one or more of its premises (propositions), but no evidence is provided to support that assumption.
*Note: Considered to be ”Informal” because the structure of the argument itself is logical, but it doesn’t prove anything because it simply restates what is already assumed in its propositions.
IMPORTANT: AN INCORRECT USAGE OF “BEGGING THE QUESTION”
When referring to the logical foundations of an argument, it’s a mistake to use this as an expression meaning “raising the question”, such as in “It’s lunchtime but I’m not hungry, which begs the question: did I overeat during breakfast?”.
REAL-LIFE EXAMPLES:
The gym-goer:
Scott is an avid gym-goer. When asked by his friend Isabelle what he does at the gym, he explains that he likes to “lift heavy (weights)”. Isabelle knows that many people injure their back each year by handling various heavy objects in daily life. So Isabelle tells Scott…
“You need to stop lifting heavy weights or you will injure your back.”
Argument structure:
Handling heavy weights can cause back injuries[a] and Scott is handling heavy weights[b], so Scott will injure his back [c].
[a]=Handling heavy weights can cause back injuries (proposition)
[b]=Scott is handling heavy weights (proposition)
[c] =Scott will injure his back (conclusion)
This fails to recognize the possibilities that…
1) Not everyone who lifts heavy at the gym gets injured from handling heavy weights
2) Scott may already be following a very careful and methodical approach to lifting heavy weights that keep him as safe as possible and unlikely to get injured as part of his normal workout process
3) Some of the injuries that people receive while handling heavy objects each year may be completely accidental in nature and out of their control rather than caused by the weight of the object itself (example: slipping, someone bumping into them, etc)
The “best book ever written”:
“ABC” is the best book available on Amazon™ because it has received the most 5-star ratings.
This assumes that “the most 5-star ratings” is the same as the “best book”. In reality, there could be a number of factors that lead to a book accumulating the highest number of 5-star ratings and that are unrelated to the quality of its writing and content. Just as the meaning of “quality writing and content” is also highly subjective and depends on who the readers are.
The “perfect couple”:
Ann and Jerry met during a night out in the town and have been in a happy relationship ever since. Whenever someone asks them how they met, they explain their story and confidently add…
“It was fate”.
This assumes that their (Ann and Jerry’s) individual life decisions leading up to the moment they met resulted in the unique and predetermined (fateful) occurrence of that event and ignores the multitudes of other available and mundane (less romantic) explanations.
IMPORTANT:
Defaulting to something like “fate” (a predetermined present event) or “destiny” (a predetermined future event), as emotionally appealing as can be, results in faulty logic.
You may think that the example above is a harmless thing, and you’d probably be correct in this case. But let’s take it a step further in the following example…
The children who were taught to act in a certain way without questioning it:
Imagine that two children have grown up in a family where all of the adults around them taught them to follow and abide by some very specific and strict life rules and guidelines. What the specific rules are is not as important as the fact that the adults that are a part of the children’s lives in the environment where they are being raised are insistent that the children should not question them or their judgment. They should simply “accept everything as factual and the right thing to do”.
There are two dangers that are present in this situation:
1) The younger the human being, the easier it is for them to be influenced by the people close to them
2) There is a great responsibility that cannot be overlooked that lays firmly on the adults or other older or otherwise perceived as authoritative people that are raising these children to teach them useful information and life skills
Now, suppose that these adults are not well-versed in the use of critical thinking skills…
CONCLUSION
Remain alert to avoid being misled by people who are using circular argument logic. Some do it accidentally, and others do it intentionally as a way to trick you into believing something that is incorrect, untrue, or otherwise unproven. This is commonly done to convince people to join a group or a cause of some sort.
Children can benefit much from being raised in an environment where the authority figures in their lives employ well-developed critical thinking skills in raising and teaching them. These skills will hopefully transfer over to the children when they grow up and assist them in making better and more sound decisions in life.
PREVIOUS ARTICLES IN THE HOW-TO BULLET-PROOF YOUR REASONING SERIES
How to Bullet-proof Your Reasoning #1: Watch out for Confirmation Bias!
How to Bullet-proof Your Reasoning #2: Understand the Burden of Proof
How to Bullet-proof Your Reasoning #3: Watch out for Special Pleading!
All the best,
Pascal
PS: You can read more about me here.
