Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: A consultant wants to use employees' skills more effectively to 'exploit' resources, but the director says no because the company has a policy against 'exploiting' people.

Conclusion: The consultant's proposal should be rejected because it would violate the company's policy against exploiting workers.

Reasoning: The consultant suggested 'exploiting' available resources (staff), but the company has a long-standing rule against 'exploiting' its workers.

Analysis: This argument falls victim to a classic logical fallacy known as equivocation. The director is treating the word 'exploit' as if it has only one meaning, failing to distinguish between 'making productive use of' and 'taking unfair advantage of.' To identify the flaw, look for an answer choice that points out this shift in the definition of a key term. It's the linguistic equivalent of a boss refusing to let you 'execute' a plan because the company has a strict policy against capital punishment.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

1.

The director's argument for rejecting the management consultant's proposal is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds?

Correct Answer
A
The argument equivocates on the key term “exploit,” conflating “fully utilize resources” with “take unfair advantage of workers.” Failing to distinguish these distinct senses undermines the conclusion.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep