Equivocation is confusing a word’s several meanings within an argument

Evidence

When we confuse the several meanings of a word or phrase, we use the word or phrase equivocally. When we do this in the context of an argument, we commit the fallacy of equivocation. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1194

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines equivocation as the technical fallacy term.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1194
• XREF: connects to: Relying on isolated phrases ripped from context commits a fallacy — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1232; Material fallacies emerge from examining term meanings rather than form — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 853; Amphibology infects the entire argument, while equivocation is confined to single terms — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1211 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Homeric epithets carry shifting contextual meanings rather than fixed senses #complicates (0.75) — Homer; Robert Fagles; Bernard Knox, The Odyssey, 4795
• Amphibology infects the entire argument, while equivocation is confined to single terms #qualifies (0.70) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1211
• Relying on isolated phrases ripped from context commits a fallacy #expands (0.60) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1232
• Material fallacies emerge from examining term meanings rather than form #exemplifies (0.55) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 853
• A fallacy is an argument that seems valid but fails logic #expands (0.50) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 776