Logical Fallacy of Question Begging Analogy

Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma which is simply the fact that the foundation of all human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regression, circular reasoning, or bare assertions without any evidence. Question-begging analogy, a form of circular reasoning, is one of these three unhappy possibilities.

The Logical Fallacy of Question Begging Analogy occurs when an analogy is made between two things, but the analogy rests on an assumption that amount to circular reasoning. It is a type of circular reasoning. INVALID FORM “A is similar to B (the similarity is dependent on an assumption which is dependent on the conclusion]. A is C. Therefore, B is C.”

Examples of the Logical Fallacy of Question Begging Analogy

“Creation scientists are like uneducated people. [assumes the conclusion]. Uneducated people don’t understand science. Therefore, Creation scientists don’t understand science.”

The false assumption is that Creation scientists are like uneducated people. Since this is an assertion contrary to fact, the only way it is supported is by the conclusion of the argument--for which it is the premise.

“The Bible is similar to an anvil that can’t be broken. When you hammer on anvils, they are strong enough to take a beating. Therefore, when you hammer on the Bible, it is strong enough to take the beating.”

This is an example of the fallacy where the conclusion is actually true despite the fact that the logic is flawed. And flawed logic is totally unnecessary to defend the Bible. Without the word, "therefore," the analogy would have been a good, but limited, analogy. We don’t believe that the Bible can stand up to any attack because it is like an anvil, though. We know, by Divine revelation, that the Bible is God’s Word without error. God speaks this into our innermost minds. Then, He speaks the same thing through the Bible. People with a dogmatic belief in not-God will assert that God doesn’t reveal anything, but they are basing this on a use-mention error. If they were interested in the truth rather than just winning an argument (what is the prize?) they would simply test Him by praying to Him with persistence, sincerity, humility, repentance, and a will to do His will. They would need to want to leave sin behind, though.