An argument that goes nowhere. Though a person believes he or she is arguing a point, the argument does not progress because the
individual provides the same point for the effect as he/she does
for the cause (i.e., the effect is just the cause stated in different words). In short, what is given as the effect is already made obvious--either overtly or implicitly--by the supporting reason provided.
To say, "I didn't like that movie because it was really bad," is to provide a premise in support of the opinion that goes without saying. It goes without saying that if one does not like the movie, he/she will not believe the movie is good. Likewise, statements such as "I am Bainz, so I am drunk," "I
enjoy listening to music when I study because music helps me to study," and "I wear Fant-Ho shades because they're the best shades" are equally circular in nature. A true argument would supply support that explains WHY Bainz is always drunk, HOW music helps the person's study habits, and WHAT makes Fant-Ho shades better than other brands.
Dumb people write circular arguments.
