Circular reasoning, also known as "begging the question," occurs when the conclusion of an argument is assumed within its premises. This creates a reasoning loop that often goes unnoticed but can significantly impact the quality of discourse in online communities. For example, a member might assert that "a rule is good because it works" without providing evidence beyond the rule's existence. Such logic can prevent forums from fostering meaningful discussions and evaluating ideas critically.
Online community managers need to recognize circular reasoning and encourage participants to back up their claims with independent evidence. This helps create an environment where ideas are challenged and refined rather than reinforced by unfounded loops.
Imagine a forum discussing the effectiveness of a specific moderation policy. One user argues, "This policy is effective because it has always worked for us." This is circular reasoning because it uses the policy's existence as evidence for its effectiveness. A more constructive approach would be to present data or examples demonstrating the policy's success. Community managers can guide users toward evidence-based arguments by gently questioning the basis of their reasoning and offering examples of strong, logical arguments.