Sometimes reasoning becomes so circular that you wonder if the speaker was listening. Here’s a circular argument I felt forced to embrace the other day:
Tamara: “Why must we have a closet full of cables?”
Britt: “Think about it dearest, would you deign to live with a guy who was so clueless that he had no boxes of cables? How could such a man even claim to be part of the great computer/Internet Renaissance? No, I’m sure if you reflect on it, You’ll feel blessed to be married to a guy with so many adapters, cables and connectors.”
Tamara: “But the problem is that you don’t use them. You just go out and buy a new one every time.”
Britt: “Well, of course. Otherwise, how could I have a closet full of cables?”
Scott Rosenberg cites an equally absurd circular argument for killing Social Security, Tripping on their own feeble arguments:
In the end, there’s one thing I can agree with the conservatives on: Social Security is only as safe as the lawmakers in Washington allow it to be. Sowell & co. say we must fear because we can’t trust the government to keep Social Security afloat. But the government he is telling us will betray Social Security isn’t in the hands of the “liberals” upon whom his finger points. It is the Bush administration that has endangered Social Security, and it is the Bush administration that now wishes to end Social Security as we know it. It may get its way. But let’s make sure the American people understand who’s responsible for the ensuing debacle.
Read the whole thing.