Circular reasoning
Uses the conclusion as a premise in its own justification.
Specimen
The policy must be correct because it was endorsed by people who only endorse correct policies .
Fabricated passage — teaching example designed for clarity.
circular reasoning — conclusion embedded in the premise
Dissection
The policy must be correct because it was endorsed by people who only endorse correct policies.
- premise assumes the conclusion
- no external evidence offered
- structured to sound like argument
Field notes
- Family
- Logical fallacy
- Habitat
- policy commentary, institutional statements, op-eds
- Frequency
- found in 5% of analyzed articles
- Confused with
- Unnamed expert , Bandwagon
In the wild
"This is the right approach — the experts who support it have a track record of backing the right approaches."
Policy commentary, trade publication, January 2026
"The public trusts the institution, and the institution's decisions are trustworthy, which is why the public is right to trust it."
Opinion section, national daily, April 2026
Why it works
The argument has the structure of evidence without the substance. Surface-level, it sounds like a supporting reason — the gap only becomes visible when you ask what the reason actually adds beyond restating the claim.
Counter-move
Restate the argument without the conclusion. Does any independent evidence remain?
See it flagged in real articles while you read.
Get the extension