Circular Reasoning is the conclusion is hidden inside the premise. It sits in the Cognition dimension (COG) of the Human Behavior Taxonomy™ as element HBT-COG-0148, within the Definition Fallacy family. The core principle: the conclusion is hidden inside the premise. In incentive terms, it matters because it changes the payoff people perceive before they choose — which means it can be designed for, or exploited.
Scientific Definition
The conclusion is hidden inside the premise.
Plain-English Definition
The conclusion is hidden inside the premise.
Feynman Explanation
Our culture is what makes us us — because our culture is what makes us us.
Core Principle
The conclusion is hidden inside the premise.
Mechanisms
The conclusion is hidden inside the premise.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Inputs (Triggers)
Pending editorial review.
Outputs (Behaviors)
Pending editorial review.
Behavioral Signature
Our culture is what makes us us — because our culture is what makes us us.
Examples
- 'Our process works because we follow it.'
- Foundational assumptions never get re-examined.
Pending editorial review.
Original analysis from The Incentives Lab — how this element behaves inside real payoff structures.
Why this element matters to incentive design
This is one of the elements leaders describe as a values gap. It is a payoff gap. The mechanism underneath it is straightforward: the conclusion is hidden inside the premise. You can recognize it in the field by its signature: our culture is what makes us us — because our culture is what makes us us. Every element in the Cognition dimension changes the perceived payoff of an action before the action happens, which is exactly where incentive design has leverage.
How it gets exploited
Left undesigned, foundational assumptions never get re-examined. It is amplified whenever foundational assumptions never get re-examined. Inside organizations that shows up as foundational assumptions never get re-examined. The pattern is the same one Goodhart's Law describes: the measurable proxy attracts the effort, and the purpose behind it quietly loses funding.
How the Lab designs around it
The redesign move is to make the desired behavior observable, remove whatever currently pays for its opposite, and attach the reward to the behavior rather than to the noisy outcome downstream of it. The test of any redesign here is simple: after the change, can you name what the organization is now doing less of? If not, the payoff structure did not actually move.
Famous Experiments
Pending editorial review.
Design Principles
Pending editorial review.
Measurement Approaches
Pending editorial review.
Evidence
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
The Perverse Incentive Lens™
How this behavior is exploited — and how to redesign around it.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Interactive Mini Network
Click any neighbor to re-center the graph and follow the threads of connection.
Knowledge Graph Neighbors
Auto-linked to the rest of the Human Behavior Taxonomy by family, domain, dimension, and shared keywords.
Assuming the conclusion in the premise.
What's true of the parts is assumed true of the whole.
Because there's no sharp line, no distinction exists.
Quietly redefining a term mid-argument.
What's true of the whole is assumed true of the parts.
Constraining the option set to bias the decision.
Insisting on a word's original meaning over its current one.
Treating two things as comparable when they're not.
Assuming the truth must lie between two extremes.
Deriving 'is' from 'ought.'
Changing success criteria whenever the prior criteria are met.
Deriving 'ought' from 'is.'
Where Circular Reasoning is cited in the corpus
Essays, field guides, and diagnostics from The Incentives Lab that apply this element.
- EssayGoodhart's Law in the Real World
How measurable proxies capture judgment.
- EssayThe Perverse Incentives Hiding in Your KPIs
Cognitive shortcuts turned into scorecards.
- CourseIncentives 101
The free ten-part primer on reading a payoff structure.
- ReferenceThe incentive glossary
Definitions for every mental model, bias, and fallacy in the corpus.
- ReferenceThe Periodic Table of Human Behavior
The full 1,267-element map this page belongs to.
Questions about Circular Reasoning
- What is Circular Reasoning?
- Circular Reasoning is the conclusion is hidden inside the premise. It sits in the Cognition dimension (COG) of the Human Behavior Taxonomy™ as element HBT-COG-0148, within the Definition Fallacy family. The core principle: the conclusion is hidden inside the premise. In incentive terms, it matters because it changes the payoff people perceive before they choose — which means it can be designed for, or exploited.
- What is an example of Circular Reasoning?
- Foundational assumptions never get re-examined. The Incentives Lab catalogs everyday, organizational, and historical instances of this element on its Human Behavior Taxonomy™ page (HBT-COG-0148).
- How is Circular Reasoning exploited?
- Foundational assumptions never get re-examined.
- How do you design around Circular Reasoning?
- Name the behavior you want in observable terms, remove what currently pays for the opposite, attach the reward to the behavior rather than a lagging proxy, and publish how you will detect gaming.
- Which behavioral dimension does Circular Reasoning belong to?
- Circular Reasoning is classified in the Cognition dimension (COG) of the Human Behavior Taxonomy™, family "Definition Fallacy", class "Logical Fallacy". Its permanent identifier is HBT-COG-0148 and its evidence grade is B.