Big I, Eye, Aye.

Begging the Question

Petitio Principii

(In the category of Fallacy of Weak Induction, or Fallacy of Presumption.)

Set-up:

X is true because X is true.

OR

p suggests q

p is supposed.

therefore, q.

OR

is true.
Statement q is true.
Statement r is true.
Statement p is true.

Statement p

Why is it fallacious?

It never actually proves the claim, just assumes it’s entire or partial truth. (X is true, because X is true). The arguer has only supposed the truth of his proof, rather than researching and factually supporting it. This renders any proof (if there is some) dependent on the truth of your claim, instead of independent. This is ‘wrong’ because proof should be able to stand on it’s own, and support the truth of your statement, not the other way around.

Essentially, the proof or premise is just as questionable as the claim.

Sometimes ‘begging the question’ is very obvious, but sometimes it’s subtler (A is true because B is true, B is true because A is true, etc.).

So, why would you want to use it?

If done correctly, you can convince someone of anything. You don’t need any proof whatsoever!

Made by Ilayda

“This product really works! Their commercial says so, and they would only say so if their product really works.”

“You should do as your mother says, because she’s your mother.”

“Humans will never fly because the human body is incapable of flight.”

Found in media

“Dear Friend, a man who has studied law to its highest degree is a brilliant lawyer, for a brilliant lawyer has studied law to its highest degree.” Oscar Wilde, De Profundis.