What logical fallacy is defined as assuming the conclusion within the premise?

The logical fallacy where the conclusion is assumed within the premise is known as begging the question. This fallacy occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, rather than supporting it. In other words, the argument takes for granted what it is supposed to prove.

For example, if someone argues, "Reading is essential for gaining knowledge because reading is important," they are assuming that reading is important in their premise, which is what they are trying to establish in their conclusion. This circular reasoning does not provide independent support for its claims, making it a classic example of begging the question.

Understanding this fallacy helps in recognizing flawed arguments in various contexts, as it highlights the importance of providing concrete evidence rather than relying on assumed truths.