All positions if questioned far enough are circular?

“We can say that at their core all positions are circular however this is not proof of the equalizations of all circular positions.”   I am stating this to address religion circular positions are not equal to the problem of deduction (reason) and the problem of induction (evidence) underlining all problems in philosophy, especially epistemology. Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, “circle in proving”; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are can be logically valid if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. Skepticism, just as epistemological argument can show everything even science data if questioned far enough are circular ; but that does not mean all circular positions are equal, which is empiricism and both inductive and deductive reasoning to address problems. But no matter the proposed fact or reasoning all individually offered propositions cannot verify themselves; a priori assumptions are always used even if unrealized. Science in the scientific method use the a priori assumption of methodological naturalism (likely there is no supernatural at all). By using this instead of the stronger reality claim of metaphysical naturalism (there is no supernatural at all), science is acknowledging how all positions if questioned far enough are circular. All deductive systems, logic in particular and philosophy in general, rely on the truth of its axioms or premises. So the problem of deduction is really that it is impossible to know the truth of axioms without assuming some a priori “fountain of truth” on which to rely. While rationalism claims access...