Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardEquivocation (Uncertain Use of a Term)

To be considered a true artist, one must produce a masterpiece and possess profound vision. The CEO's new strategic plan for the conglomerate is universally hailed by financial analysts as a masterpiece. Furthermore, the CEO demonstrated profound vision by accurately anticipating the recent global market crash and adjusting the company's investments accordingly. Therefore, the CEO is a true artist.

The argument's reasoning is deeply flawed. Which of the following accurately describes an instance of equivocation (the illicit shifting of a term's meaning) committed by the author? Select all that apply.

  1. It uses "vision" to mean creative or aesthetic imagination in one context, but strategic or predictive foresight in another context.Answer
  2. B
    It confuses a condition that is necessary for a designation with a condition that is sufficient to guarantee that designation.
  3. It employs the term "masterpiece" to denote a monumental work of fine art initially, but later uses it to describe a highly successful corporate strategy.Answer
  4. D
    It relies on the unwarranted assumption that accurately anticipating a market crash is the primary cause of a company's financial survival.
  5. It shifts the meaning of the word "artist" from a creator of traditional art forms to a practitioner exhibiting high-level competence in a corporate profession.Answer

Answer

The correct choices are those that identify the shifts in meaning for the terms 'vision', 'masterpiece', and 'artist'.
The correct choices accurately identify the three distinct semantic shifts occurring in the stimulus. The author takes terms traditionally associated with the fine arts ('vision', 'masterpiece', 'artist') and applies them in a fundamentally different, metaphorical sense to a corporate executive's business acumen. Because the argument relies on these words maintaining a consistent literal meaning to logically connect the first premise to the conclusion, these shifts constitute equivocations.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the question stem to determine the specific task.
The stem requires identifying instances of 'equivocation' (the shifting of a term's meaning). It explicitly asks to 'Select all that apply', meaning multiple choices will be correct.
Understanding the exact constraint of the question is crucial, as the argument contains multiple types of logical flaws.
2
Evaluate the stimulus for any terms that change meaning between the premises and the conclusion.
The terms 'artist', 'masterpiece', and 'vision' are used in a fine arts context in the first sentence, but are applied in a corporate/financial context in the subsequent sentences.
Equivocation occurs when an argument relies on a word maintaining a single definition, but illicitly switches between two different definitions.
3
Evaluate each option against the findings from Step 2.
Three options accurately describe the semantic shifts of 'vision', 'masterpiece', and 'artist'.
These options directly answer the prompt's request to identify instances of equivocation.
4
Analyze the remaining incorrect options to ensure they do not describe an equivocation.
One incorrect option describes a conditional logic flaw (necessary vs. sufficient). Another describes a causal flaw. Neither describes a semantic shift.
Distractors in hard questions often describe actual flaws present in the stimulus that do not answer the specific question being asked.

Key Concept

Equivocation (Uncertain Use of a Term)
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Equivocation (Uncertain Use of a Term)

More questions from this topic