a begging of the question.
Latin] Conclusion contained in the premise.
the logical fallacy of assuming the conclusion in the premises; begging the question
(also known as, begging the question, circular reasoning or vicious circularity) occurs when its premises presuppose, directly or indirectly, the truth of its conclusion. The function of the premises of an argument is to support its conclusion, and if we have to accept the truth of the conclusion in order to accept the premises then the premises have failed to do their job. Proving the fallacy involves identifying the culpable premise, which is best done by standardizing the argument. One of the premises of an argument is identical to the conclusion or logically equivalent to it; or One of the premises of an argument is such that we could not accept it unless we had already accepted the conclusion (Angeles, 1992, pp. 106-107; Hughes, 1996, pp. 130-131; Johnson & Blair, 1977, pp. 179-183; and Runes, 1962, p. 108).
See Begging the question.