Question

Circular reasoning is not always considered logically wrong but is typically seen as unhelpful. The argument If A then B, and if B then A is an example of an if and only if statement, not circular reasoning. Circular arguments, such as A therefore A, are logically correct but lack substantive proof since they are equivalent to the premise itself. While circular reasoning is always correct, it doesn't contribute meaningful information about the truth of the proposition. The example If I am purple, then I am purple, therefore you should believe that I am purple is criticized as a non-sequitur, as it doesn't logically lead to the conclusion that the speaker is purple. Circular reasoning can be deceptive, with the circularity sometimes well-hidden in a proof, making it appear more robust than it actually is. In summary, while circular reasoning may be logically sound, it is often considered unproductive and insufficient for establishing the truth of a proposition. Why is the argument If A then B, and if B then A not an example of circular reasoning?

a. It lacks a clear premise.

b. It is an if and only if statement.

c. It contains contradictory statements.

d. It fails to establish a logical connection

Answer 1

The argument 'If A then B, and if B then A' is not an example of circular reasoning because it is an if and only if statement.

Step-by-step explanation:

The argument 'If A then B, and if B then A' is not an example of circular reasoning because it is an if and only if statement. Circular reasoning occurs when an arguer assumes the truth of the conclusion they aim to prove, but in the given argument, there is no assumption made about the truth of either A or B explicitly.