# 46. Logical Manipulation ## 46.5. Methodology/Refinements/Sub-species ### 46.5.8. Begging the question (aka *petitio principii*) This is a type of informal fallacy in which a proposition relies on an implicit premise to establish the truth of that same proposition. In other words, it is a statement that refers to its own assertion to prove the assertion. Such arguments are of the form "A is true because A is true", though rarely is it stated like this because that really would be a bit too obvious. So, often the premise "A" is only one of many premises that go into proving that "A" is true as a conclusion. "Begging the question" is employed by a manipulator either rhetorically, or slipped into a formal document, in the hope that it passes unnoticed and allows a bigger conclusion to be drawn. It is an old trick, with the first known definition in the West by Aristotle around 350 BC. The following is a case of begging the question: "Paranormal phenomena exist because I have had experiences that can only be described as paranormal." The conclusion of this argument is that paranormal phenomena exist. The premise assumes that the arguer has had paranormal experiences, and therefore assumes that paranormal experiences exist. The arguer should not be granted the assumption that his experiences were paranormal, but should be made to provide support for the claim. However, amazingly large numbers of victims don't even recognise that they are being manipulated by this obvious mechanism.