Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardEquivocation (Uncertain Use of a Term)

Sociologist: A society can only be considered free if its citizens are not subject to systemic coercion. As modern neuroscience has demonstrated, every human action is the inevitable result of prior neurological states governed by inflexible natural laws. Since our actions are dictated by these inescapable natural laws, they are completely determined by forces outside our control. Thus, we are constantly subject to systemic coercion. Therefore, no human society can truly be considered free.

Which of the following accurately describe a logical flaw in the sociologist's reasoning? Select all that apply.

  1. It equivocates with respect to the concept of "coercion," using it to refer to interpersonal or political oppression in one context and physical determinism in another.Answer
  2. It illicitly shifts the meaning of the term "free" from a state of political or social liberty to a state of metaphysical independence.Answer
  3. C
    It confuses a condition that is necessary for a society to be considered free with a condition that is sufficient to guarantee that it is free.
  4. D
    It infers that a society as a whole is subject to systemic coercion merely because its individual members are governed by natural laws.
  5. E
    It attempts to weaken the premise about neurological determinism by applying a sociological definition of freedom.

Answer

The argument is flawed because it illicitly shifts the meanings of two key terms: it uses "coercion" to mean both social oppression and physical determinism, and "free" to mean both political liberty and metaphysical independence.
The sociologist's argument relies entirely on using words in wildly different senses. It uses a political and sociological definition of 'coercion' (meaning oppression by human agents or institutions) in its first premise, but then applies the term 'coercion' to the inflexible laws of physics and neuroscience. Consequently, the concept of being 'free' shifts from meaning 'politically free' to 'metaphysically free' (possessing free will over natural laws). The options describing these illicit semantic shifts correctly identify the logical flaw.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first premise to identify the initial context of the key terms.
The argument defines a "free" society as one where citizens are not subject to "systemic coercion," establishing a clear political and sociological context.
Understanding the original context of the terms is necessary to detect a semantic shift later in the argument.
2
Analyze the subsequent premises and the conclusion.
The argument introduces neuroscience and natural laws, claiming that humans are "completely determined by forces outside our control." It equates this determinism with "systemic coercion," leading to the conclusion that no society is "free."
This reveals how the argument attempts to bridge scientific determinism with sociological conditions.
3
Compare the usage of key terms across the premises.
The terms "free" and "coercion" change meanings entirely. In the sociological premise, they refer to human political agency and human-driven oppression. In the scientific premise, they refer to metaphysical free will and physical causality.
Identifying this dual-meaning shift reveals the central logical flaw of equivocation.
4
Evaluate the answer choices against the identified flaw.
The choices describing the specific semantic shifts in "coercion" and "free" accurately pinpoint the argument's vulnerability.
In a multi-select format, identifying all manifestations of the core flaw is required for the correct answer.

Key Concept

Equivocation occurs when a single term is used in two different senses within the same argument, creating a false logical bridge between unrelated concepts.
Rate this question

Topics

Equivocation (Uncertain Use of a Term)

More questions from this topic