TED-Ed: Can you outsmart the college admissions fallacy? | Elizabeth Cox

The video discusses circular reasoning, using the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) case as an example. It explains how VMI's exclusion of women was justified through circular logic, which was challenged in court. The Supreme Court eventually ruled against VMI, highlighting the flaws in their reasoning. The video also provides historical context and examples of circular reasoning, emphasizing the importance of questioning assumptions.

What does the term 'exceedingly persuasive justification' refer to in the context of gender-based exclusion?

In what ways does the text suggest that assumptions can lead to flawed reasoning?

How does the text illustrate the difference between a statement of fact and a reasoned argument?