It recently occurred to me that "implication" might not be the best word, or more likely that I misinterpreted it, in the same way I initially misunderstood the logical definition of "formal" and "informal" when we started studying fallacies.
I think another way of looking at the Aristotelian standpoint would be to say that it acknowledges the existence of things that exist. That way the circularity is more like a tautology than a fallacy.
