Circular Reasoning: Difference between revisions

Line 84:

== Real Life ==

* The British used ~~a similar~~ line of reasoning ~~against~~ ~~employing~~ homosexuals in the Secret Service ~~(when it was illegal); it was~~

* The British used this line of reasoning to maintain the ban on homosexuals in the Secret Service:

{{quote|Homosexuals cannot be employed in the Secret Service because they are a security risk.

Therefore, any homosexual employed by the Secret Service would lose his job if he were found out.

Line 90:

Therefore, homosexual employees of the Secret Service are more open to blackmail than non-homosexual employees.

Therefore, homosexuals present a security risk and should not be employed in the Secret Service. }}

** Oddly enough, it was also thought to be a reason why they would make good agents; hiding one's activities, meeting covertly and maintaining a respectable front to avoid suspicion are the kind of skills the Service found useful.

:* Oddly enough, it was also thought to be a reason why they would make good agents - hiding one's activities, meeting covertly and maintaining a respectable front to avoid suspicion are the kind of skills the Service found useful.

* According to [[Isaac Asimov]], this was used in [[The Dung Ages|the Middle Ages]] as an excuse not to educate women; all intelligent people know Latin, but women don't know Latin so they must be stupid, which means that there's no point in teaching them Latin (or anything else). This is also the fallacy of confusing knowledge with intelligence, which [[Insult Friendly Fire|also]] underpins large parts of so-called "[[You Fail the IQ Test|intelligence tests]]".

* A '''monarchy''' is a nation ruled by a monarch; a '''monarch''' someone who rules a monarchy. What with [[Hereditary Republic]]s, [[Elective Monarchy|Elective Monarchies]], and Presidents-For-Life, that's about the clearest definitions there are, and political scientists often admit that sometimes the only difference between a monarchy and a republic are the titles involved.

** Practically, it's often the same:

{{quote|'''L. Gumilev''': The Romans didn't notice the Republic was replaced with the Empire for three hundred years, and only when Diocletian changed the court etiquette found out they have a monarchy. }}

* ~~The~~ supposedly non-religious (or even better, "rational") movements descended from Puritanism usually inherit most doctrines of their parents, including Predestination. Then they try to replace the original underlying theology with quick patches, which tend to result in something [//www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/05/ol3-jacobite-history-of-world/] like this:

* Many supposedly non-religious (or even better, "rational") movements descended from Puritanism (think [[PETA]] in this case) usually inherit most doctrines of their parents, including Predestination. Then they try to replace the original underlying theology with quick patches, which tend to result in something [http: //www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/05/ol3-jacobite-history-of-world/] like this:

{{quote|~~there~~ is a clip of Ingrid Newkirk in which she makes the following proposition: animal rights is a social-justice movement. All social-justice movements in the past have been successful. Therefore, the animal-rights movement will inevitably succeed.

{{quote|There is a clip of Ingrid Newkirk in which she makes the following proposition: animal rights is a social-justice movement. All social-justice movements in the past have been successful. Therefore, the animal-rights movement will inevitably succeed.

This is pure Whig history. It postulates a mysterious force that animates the course of history, and operates inevitably in the progressive direction. Note the circular reasoning: social justice succeeds because social justice is good. How do we know that social justice is good? Because it succeeds, and good tends to triumph over evil. How do we know that good tends to triumph over evil? Well, just look at the record of social-justice movements. }}

This is pure Whig history. It postulates a mysterious force that animates the course of history, and operates inevitably in the progressive direction. Note the circular reasoning: social justice succeeds because social justice is good. How do we know that social justice is good? Because it succeeds, and good tends to triumph over evil. How do we know that good tends to triumph over evil? Well, just look at the record of social-justice movements.}}

* In maths, whenever trying to solve an equation results in something like x = x.

* In maths, whenever trying to solve an equation results in something like x = x. But note that this doesn't necessarily imply a mistake - it typically appears in linear algebra when two redundant equations get subtracted from each other.

** But note that this doesn't necessarily imply a mistake. It typically appears in linear algebra when two redundant equations get substracted from each other.