What type of argument refers to itself as evidence of truth?

A circular argument is a type of reasoning where the conclusion is included in the premise, essentially using its own assertion as evidence for its truth. This means that the argument doesn't provide independent support but rather repeats the initial claim as proof of itself. For example, in a statement like "The Bible is true because it says so," the argument hinges on the very assertion it is trying to prove, creating a closed loop of reasoning.

In contrast, the other types mentioned do not share this self-referential characteristic. Overgeneralization involves making broad claims based on insufficient evidence, whereas a logical fallacy is a flaw in reasoning that does not adhere to sound principles of logic. A false dichotomy presents only two options when more exist, thereby misleading the argument. Circular arguments are distinct because they rely solely on the premises being true without external validation.