LR Problem Set #1, Q: 67

[moshei24]

Hi!

Is this question circular reasoning because the senator in general holds of the position that no true art work is obscene, so when he argues later on, it's assumed that he already holds of the position and is using it to argue for his point?

Can you clarify this question for me a little bit please?

Thanks!

[Joshua Kronick]

Sort of. Circular reasoning can be best explained by understanding that it's really just where the premise and conclusion are identical. Remember, the conclusion show follow logically from the premise in a proper argument, in circular reasoning the conclusion and premise are one in the same. Here, the premise can be best identified as: "if something is obscene it's not a work of art," the conclusion is, "it's obscene, so it can't be art." Notice how the two are identical.

[moshei24]

Right, the Senator assumed the position he is seeking to establish, so he really doesn't have any support for his conclusion besides for his own premise that he established. He never actually gives reasoning that leads to the conclusion. His reasoning is that he holds a certain way, and that is in essence circular reasoning. "It is so, because I said so."