Begging the Question & Circular Logic very similar

[ghost]

trafficstars

Circular Logic

A conclusion is derived from premise based on the conclusion

Begging the Question

Hiding other contributing factors and supporting the truth of your claim without any evidence other than the conclusion on your claim

Aren't those essentially the same? or is there a subtle difference I don't get.

[LukeStonehm]

There are very similar, but there is a subtle difference. The best explination of this difference that I can find is here: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Begging_the_question Let me know if that makes sense :smile:

[ghost]

I tried to get my head around it but still I cannot spot the difference. What confuses me is that in the RationalWiki they say that:

It is often called circular reasoning, although sometimes it's considered distinct with the distinction that circular reasoning is:

A implies B which implies A

Begging the question similarly takes the form:

A implies B and A is only valid because B is assumed.

But when I look at the example in the app I don't understand the difference between the illegal drugs example and the privacy rights one.

oh.. and thanks for your time :)

[LukeStonehm]

The examples are reversible I would say. I'll update the app with more specific examples, I can see where the confusion would arise. I would say that both examples could be applied to both fallacies. As rationalWiki says, there are similar with very subtle differences, but now I agree with you that perhaps they are not distinct enough.

Thanks for pointing this out :)

[verdulo]

Similar problem with arguments 'Composition' and 'Spotlight' - they are almost identical.