Give me some examples of a circular argument?

Question

spiritually speaking?

Answer 1

petitio principii, in which the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises...

God exists because the bible says so....
The bible is true because god says so...

That would be a religious circular argument.

Answer 2

Circular Argument Example

Answer 3

Circular Argument Fallacy

Answer 4

I'm going to take a crack at this... but I would suggest right off the bat, John Frames book, "the doctrine of the Knowledge of God"... in it he has some chapters on Epistemology. Interesting read, and answers your question better than I will. Yes. That is circular logic. I am a Christian... been a follower of Jesus now for 13 years. Those statements do assume an external value and volition. And we are saying that External value and volition does not exist if there is no God, and then we say External value and volition prove God... I think I am clear on what you are saying? And I think you are right in calling that circular logic. However, 1. In the end, most arguments end up being circular. We can not escape it. 2. The Christian world view is a circle large enough to fit in it all that we can know. How does the deceleration of independence go... some thing about "these truths being SELF EVIDENT". Volition can be assumed, self evident, so to speak, or else you are a fatalist. And if that is so, then this conversation does not really matter. The existence of an external value seems to be self evident (so to speak) in that we talk in those terms. We have universal understanding of not perfect and perfect. We live in a world of incomplete, and broken, and faulty. It is there in the language, in our very souls, the assumption that there is a perfect to be measured to. Let me also add this. As a Bible believing theist, the Bible tells me that some truths God has put into man... mainly, the existence of God and right and wrong. (This is the part where I try to convert you to a certain faith... lets face it... you asked for it. You actually asked the opposite, but I couldn't resist. ;) .....). So I don't think I have to go around and prove or defend a lot of what I believe. The fact is, Jesus Christ, as presented in the Bible is the only one who can forgive sins. I don't need to argue that it is true... It simply is. I am sure you are happy in your beliefs.

Answer 5

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/avT9k

As a fellow Agnostic, I hear these same circular arguments from my Christian friends all the time. Instead of beginning by evaluating the facts/evidence on hand and using them to come to a logical conclusion, Christians (and most Theists in general) BEGIN with their version of the "conclusion" and attempt to justify it through pseudo-intellectual "reasoning" that ignores any logic or evidence that might contradict their flawed presuppositions. Logically, the chances of the existence of intelligent life as we know it, on a planet that has the conditions which can support such life, is not "unlikely" or "improbable," but instead is 100%. Earth is the only planet so far discovered that has the conditions which can support such life. That's a 1:1 ratio. There is simply not enough current information on any other planets in the universe to make a Theistic statement either provable or even probable. Your Theistic friends are just using a version of the "God of the Gaps" concept to explain the gaps in current scientific knowledge/evidence in their favor. The existence of a Supreme Being is certainly logically possible, but not necessarily likely or even probable based on our current knowledge of the universe. And remember that the existence of certain SPECIFIC versions of a Supreme Being (like the Christian version of "God," for example) are actually logically DISPROVABLE. This makes certain Theistic positions completely untenable.

Answer 6

give examples circular argument

Answer 7

Catherine E's first example is a circular argument/begging the question.

Her second example is more of a "special pleading" argument.

Here's a good (non-religious) one:

"What you are doing must be criminal, otherwise it wouldn't be against the law"

Answer 8

The mutual authentication case has been well covered.

Then there's the "true Scotsman" concept applied to Christianity, which is a slightly different self-working argument:

"Any Christian who becomes an atheist, must not have been a true Christian, because no true Christian can can fall away and become atheist."

Oh, just for the heck of it, have a non religious "false framework" example. I've seen the like in creation/evolution debates, over the earth being being beautifully located to support human life, for instance.
"Why are you painting white lines in the middle of the road?"
"To keep the tigers away."
"But there aren't any tigers round here!"
"Good stuff, isn't it!"

Answer 9

The (insert body of scripture of your choice) is true because it says so in the (same body of scripture). I think (but don't quote me on this) that the Qur'an has such an example of a fallacy of argument.

Answer 10

The Bible is the actual word of God.
How do you know?
Because the Bible says so.
So how do you know it's right?
Because it's the word of God!

It's impossible for anything to have always existed, therefore there must be a creator.
So who created the creator?
The creator has always existed.