Talk:Circular reasoning

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2012; 2013; 2014; 2022;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Logic Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic

This article was selected as the article for improvement on 30 September 2013 for a period of one week.

The problem of induction is unrelated to the topic of the article

Latest comment: 11 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

See heading. The paragraph on 'The problem of induction' - quite apart from taking Feinberg and Scahfer-landau's assertion as fact - is unrelated to the topic of this article. Induction (outside mathematical proof by induction) is not an example of circular reasoning. The paragraph should be removed from this article.

Nor, by the way, is it actually circular to apply the scientific method to evaluation of the scientific method; it is merely recursive and that is not the same thing. One needs only to come up with a valid means to refute a general hypothesis of success of the scientific method to break the recursion. Refuting the general hypothesis would be a successful (if disappointing) evaluation result. The issue there would be the same as for any inductive assumption; one would have to demonstrate that _success_ in the particular test case necessarily implies the general hypothesis on _all_ cases, and in general that is not true. SLR Ellison (talk) 23:53, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

I agree. If you delete that paragraph it would be fine. Dezaxa (talk) 14:58, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

This page was redesigned at the edge.

A page that knows where it met you.

Talk:Circular reasoning

The problem of induction is unrelated to the topic of the article