AI / Analysis & Decision Making
Find the Switched Definition
Same word, two meanings, one argument
Here is the argument: [paste it]. Find where a term changes meaning. Requirements: 1) List the recurring key terms and what each one actually means in each sentence; 2) Show the step where meaning A slides into meaning B, quoting both sentences side by side; 3) Explain which conclusion the slide makes look supported; 4) Pin the term to a single meaning and rewrite the argument; 5) Does it still hold? If not, which step is missing. Do not comment on style.
How to use
Circle the single most important word yourself, then see which sentence quietly redefines it — usually the least conspicuous one.
Good for
- The argument reads smoothly, every sentence sounds reasonable, and you still can't say what's wrong — you just feel steered.
- You have to push back in the meeting against a claim that just got applause, and you need one question aimed at one specific sentence.
Not for
- The disagreement is factual, both sides mean the same thing by the words, and the numbers differ — check the numbers, not the vocabulary.
- The argument is sloppy everywhere — chasing each shifted term is slow; go straight to the shortest path to disproof.
Example
Input
“We already deliver the industry's best user experience, so we should price at the high end. Our NPS is 62 versus the competition's 48.”
What you get
The shift is in “user experience”: the first sentence's “best” means an NPS score, while “high-end pricing” needs willingness to pay, and a high NPS only says people will recommend you, not that they'll pay more. Pin the term to “highest NPS” and the argument supports nothing about price. The missing step: of those 62-point users, how many renew after a 30% increase — until that number exists, high-end pricing has no basis.
Common mistakes
- Using it as a fault-finding machine: every argument has some inconsistent wording, so every proposal gets blocked with “you switched definitions” and nothing moves.
- Pasting the conclusion without the source text — it has to guess at meanings, and the switch it finds is usually in a sentence you never wrote.
Try tweaking it like this
- Swap “find the equivocation” for “list every undefined key term,” and settle definitions before arguing about right and wrong.
- Add “if you could fix one sentence to make the argument work, which one” — turn the teardown into a repair.