Free LSAT resources
Free law school admissions resources

Circular reasoning

(CircR)

Arguments for which accepting one of the premises involves having already accepted the conclusion.

Avg. 0.1 per section
0%
10%
60%
10%
20%

Avg. difficulty: 3.4

Key tactics

  • In arguments featuring circular reasoning, either 1) a premise, or 2) an assumption required by the argument will simply be a restatement of the conclusion using different phrasing. Consider the following argument:
  • Every claim in Scientology's holy text is true. I know this because the text itself states plainly that it includes nothing but the truth.
  • In the above argument, the only person who would be persuaded by the premise (who, in other words, is willing to trust the Scientology text's claims unquestioningly), is someone who already believes the conclusion (that every claim in the text is true). The argument assumes the truth of its conclusion.
  • Circular reasoning more often shows up as a wrong answer choice in flaw questions (accusing the argument of circular reasoning when in fact the flaw is something else). Perhaps the primary value in learning to recognize this flaw when it happens is to build your confidence in saying it HASN'T happened in a given stimulus. In the history of the LSAT, circular reasoning has been the correct answer on fewer than 20 questions.

Answer choice tips

  • Example answer choices that point to this flaw:
  • assumes what it seeks to establish.
  • precludes the possibility of disconfirming evidence.
  • presupposes what it sets out to conclude.
  • contains a premise that presupposes the truth of the conclusion.

Looking for more?

7Sage offers a full course of video lessons that cover each question type in depth, targeted drills, and performance analytics.

Logical reasoning question types

Alternate explanation Analogy (LR) Argument part Bad authority Causal chain Causal mechanism Causal reasoning Circular reasoning Conditional reasoning Confusing sufficiency and necessity Correlation Diagram? Directionally wrong Eliminating options Equivocation Evaluate Except (LR) Failed alternate explanation False dichotomy Fighting the hypothetical Fill in the blank Flaw or descriptive weakening Illusory inconsistency Inference Internal contradiction Irrelevant corroboration Kick it up Lack of support v. false conclusion Link assumption Main conclusion or main point Math Mental state v. reality Method of reasoning or descriptive Miscellaneous (LR) Misdirected response Most strongly supported Must be false Must be true Necessary assumption Parallel flawed method of reasoning Parallel method of reasoning Part v. whole Phenomenon-hypothesis (LR) Plausibility Point at issue: agree Point at issue: disagree Principle PSA - find or complete the application PSA - find the rule Quantifier Relative v. absolute Resolve reconcile or explain Rule-application Sampling Source attack Strengthen Sufficient assumption Time Unwarranted assumption Value judgment Weaken Weighing factors

Reading comprehension question types

Analogy (RC) Application Art Author’s attitude Author’s perspective Comparative Critique or debate Describe approach Describe organization Describe relationship Except (RC) Humanities Implied Law Logical continuation Main point Meaning in context (of word, phrase, or idea) Miscellaneous (RC) Other’s perspective Phenomenon-hypothesis (RC) Principle or generalization Problem-analysis Purpose in context (of word, phrase, or idea) Purpose of paragraph Purpose of passage Science Single position Spotlight Stated Structure WSE (RC)

Confirm action

Are you sure?