Arguing in a circle is another form of the same fallacy.  It assumes

what is awaiting proof.  For example, to the question, 'How do you find the

velocity of light?' the reply might be given, 'We find that from the distance

of the stars'.  If the questioner continued, 'How do you know the distance of

the stars?' and the reply was, 'We know that from the velocity of light', the

whole process would simply be arguing in a circle.

English lends itself particularly to the fallacy of 'begging the

question' as it abounds in synonyms derived from several languages.  A writer

who begins in plain Anglo -Saxon, and proceeds in language derived from

Latin, should be watched, for he may be telling you nothing, when he appears

most erudite.  If, for example, he says that 'life is a vital force', he has

merely repeated the idea of 'life' in two languages.

The fallacy called ignoratio elenchi is simply arguing beside the

point, distracting the attention by irrelevant considerations.  We quote

Minto here:

'We should hold the point clearly in our minds, and watch indefatigably

for corroborating propositions.  But none of us being capable of this,

all of us being subject to bewilderment by a rapid whirl of statements,

and all of us biased more or less for or against a conclusion, the

sophist has facilities for doing two things -- taking for granted that

he has stated the required premisses petitio principii and proving, to

perfect demonstration something which is not the point in dispute, but

which we are willing to mistake for it'.

John Stuart Mill gives the following classification that may prove

useful in further studies regarding fallacies:

Of Simple Inspection

F.

A Priori.

Inductive F.

F.

Of Observation.

F.

Of Generalization.

Deductive F.

F.

Of Ratiocination.

Of Inference

F. Of Confusion.

The fallacy a priori is the argument from cause to effect.  The fallacy

of observation is illustrated by the excitement caused when an 'Old Moore's

prophecy' comes true, and the complete non -observation of the scores of

'prophecies' that never approach fulfilment.  The fallacy of generalization

we have considered under the heading Non -sequitur ('It does not follow').

The fallacies of ratiocination are examples of faulty logic.  The fallacies

of confusion we have already dealt with under various other items.

We shall have to deal with this important phase of our study again,

approaching it from other angles.