The use of evidence that loops back to itself as support is termed?

The term that describes the use of evidence that loops back to itself as support is a circular argument. In a circular argument, the conclusion of the argument is assumed in one of the premises, meaning that the reason given for a claim is essentially the same as the claim itself. This type of reasoning does not provide any new or independent support for the argument but rather restates the initial claim in a different way.

For example, if someone asserts, “The law is valid because it is what the law says,” they are not providing any external justification for the law; instead, they are simply reiterating the assertion in different words. Circular arguments can be deceptive because they can give the semblance of a valid logical structure while not actually providing genuine proof or support.

Understanding this concept is vital in critical thinking, as it helps to identify when reasoning is flawed. The other terms, like logical fallacy, slippery slope, and false dichotomy, refer to different types of flawed reasoning or argumentative strategies that do not directly describe the self-referential nature of circular arguments.