Circular arguments are a form of logical fallacy in which the proposition is supported by the premises, which is supported by the proposition. That may sound confusing at first, but don't worry: we'll break it down for you!

A circular argument is a form of logical fallacy in which the proposition is supported by the premises, which is supported by the proposition.

A circular argument is a form of logical fallacy in which the proposition is supported by the premises, which is supported by the proposition.

This can sometimes happen with narcissists. They'll say something like: "I'm a great person because I'm so confident" or "I know I'm good at everything because people tell me so."

The following are examples of circular arguments.

The following are examples of circular arguments:

  • You’re too sensitive. I don’t know why you get so upset.
  • You should be ashamed of yourself for talking to me like that! We need to talk about your behavior.
  • How dare you say I was late! When did this happen? And what time is it now? Did we agree on a time? Did I say anything about being late? Clearly, it’s your fault and not mine if we weren’t clear about when we were meeting up—so why would I apologize and be sincere when clearly this isn't the issue here...

These are all narcissistic circular arguments because they involve the person who makes them refusing accountability by deflecting blame onto another person or situation in order to avoid taking responsibility for their actions and behavior. An example of gaslighting could be something like “I didn't do anything wrong/you imagined it/it wasn't my fault!" Your partner may say things like this often to try and make you question yourself so much that eventually they can shift responsibility away from themselves entirely—or at least until the next time something goes wrong between the two of them!

"Abortion should be illegal because it's murder."

This is an example of using circular logic to try to win an argument. You are arguing against abortion by saying that abortion is murder and that murder is wrong, but if you look at why people have abortions in the first place, it's usually because they need or want one. So if you're opposed to abortion because it's murder, then does that mean that your stance on murdering someone would change depending on their reasons for doing so?

In this case, we have a person who thinks he has a perfectly valid reason for murdering someone else—he thinks they deserve it—but argues against another person's perfectly valid reason for committing murder: self-defense. He doesn't seem interested in listening to any other arguments about whether abortion should be legal or not; he just wants his own opinion heard without having anyone challenge him or explore why his opinion might be flawed.

"Marriage should be between a man and a woman because that's the way it's always been."

Narcissistic circular arguments are not limited to marriage equality. They're used in many debates on a variety of issues, including healthcare reform, climate change and gun control. These arguments are characterized by the use of one or more of the following tactics:

  • Ignoring facts that don't support your argument
  • Refusing to acknowledge new information or research that contradicts your position
  • Presenting an absurd premise as common sense or fact ("this is how things have always been")

"X is the best meal because it tastes better than anything else."

Narcissistic circular arguments are ones that argue that something is true or false based on comparing it to itself. In other words, the premise of an argument is the same as its conclusion. In this case, both "X is the best meal because it tastes better than anything else" and "Y is not a good meal because its taste doesn't compare with X" are narcissistic circular arguments because they make no reference to any other options besides themselves (i.e., there's nothing else out there that could be used to evaluate them).

This type of argument can also occur when someone uses himself as his own reference point: "I am right about X because I am always right." This type of statement does not require another party for verification; instead, it relies on an unwavering belief in one's own infallibility as proof of X's legitimacy

Circular arguments occur when narcissists justify their behavior by claiming that your behavior justifies their behavior. This is often known as "gaslighting."

Narcissists use circular logic to justify their behavior. If a narcissist has done something that you strongly disagree with, they will twist your words or say things to make it seem like your behavior was wrong, and that only then is theirs justified. This type of reasoning is known as gaslighting.

It's important to remember that no one can ever truly justify their actions or words in circles. For example:

  • "You are always getting upset with me when I do this."
  • "No, I am not!", because the other person is always getting upset at them for doing this thing

In reality, circular arguments never make sense because they're based on premises that are untrue (the narcissist's assertion) or don't support his/her argument at all (the narcissist's conclusion).

"You cannot expect me to love you when you're so negative all the time."

Narcissists will often use circular arguments as a way to avoid responsibility for their own behavior, feelings, and actions. It's a way for them to deflect blame onto you. A common example might be: "You cannot expect me to love you when you're so negative all the time." This isn't necessarily an attempt at an argument; it's just an excuse not to be accountable for their own feelings or actions—even if they are the ones who are being negative!

"I can't help myself if I overspend on my credit card. It's your fault for giving me access to so much money."

It is not your fault that the narcissist overspends on their credit card. This is a circular argument because it ends up blaming you for what they've done. The narcissist wants to make you feel guilty and responsible for their actions, but this isn't fair or reasonable.

It's not healthy or reasonable to assume that someone else is responsible for our spending habits and behavior—that's where we're going wrong with our own personal finances!

"You always want to know where I am, so I cheated on you" (rather than trying to explain that they did it because they wanted to).

Narcissists use circular arguments to make their partners feel guilty and responsible for whatever the narcissist has done. If you get into a circular argument with your partner, it's important to understand that they're using a tactic designed to manipulate you.

To respond effectively:

  • Don't take responsibility for anything the narcissist did or didn't do—this is what they want! Instead, ask them specific questions about why they did whatever they did (e.g., "Why did you tell me that?").
  • Make sure that your tone of voice doesn't sound accusing or confrontational; treat them like someone who isn't trying to hurt you with their words. This will help keep things on track so we can actually solve our problems together instead of argue about who's right or wrong in this situation—and whether or not we even agree on what happened in the first place!

Narcissists will use circular logic to argue against you, or twist your words so that their behavior seems justified.

If a narcissist is acting aggressively towards you, or if you are being put down in any way, they will often use circular logic to justify their behavior. This means that they'll argue that their behavior is justified because of your behavior. Or they'll argue that your behavior is justified because of their behavior.

They might also claim that they are justified in doing something because they are justified in not doing something—this kind of reasoning has come to be known as "the narcissist's fallacy." It seems like an obvious fallacy at first glance, but it can get pretty confusing when paired with narcissistic tendencies and circular reasoning!


Narcissists are just trying to make themselves feel better about their actions and the way they treat others. By using circular arguments, they can convince themselves that their behavior is justified by the way in which others have treated them.