LSAT Explanation PT 27, S4, Q22: Words like "employee," "payee," and "detainee"

LSAT Question Stem

The reasoning in the argument could have remained unchanged in force and focus if which one of the following had been advanced as a counterexample in place of the word "absentee"? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Misc question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is E. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the passage and break it down into simpler terms. The passage states that words ending in -ee generally refer to the person affected by an action performed by someone else. For example, an "employee" is employed by someone else. However, the word "absentee" is presented as a counterexample because it refers to the person who performs the action of absenting oneself. To resolve this issue, the passage suggests that if a word with the -ee ending refers to one party in a two-party transaction, it refers to the party at which the other party's action is directed.

Now, let's look at the question type and what it's asking us to do. This is a Misc. question type, and it's asking us to find an alternative counterexample that would have preserved the force and focus of the original argument, just like the word "absentee."

Let's go through the answer choices one by one:

a) Honoree: This word refers to a person who is honored by someone else, which follows the generalization in the passage. It's not a suitable counterexample because it involves a two-party transaction, so we can eliminate this choice.

b) Appointee: This word refers to a person who is appointed by someone else, also following the generalization. It involves a two-party transaction, so it's not a suitable counterexample, and we can eliminate this choice.

c) Nominee: This word refers to a person who is nominated by someone else, again following the generalization. It involves a two-party transaction, so it's not a suitable counterexample, and we can eliminate this choice.

d) Transferee: This word refers to a person who is transferred by someone else, once more following the generalization. It involves a two-party transaction, so it's not a suitable counterexample, and we can eliminate this choice.

e) Escapee: This word refers to a person who escapes, which does not follow the generalization. It doesn't involve a two-party transaction, as no one else is involved in the action of escaping. Therefore, this word functions as a counterexample, just like "absentee."

The correct answer is E, "escapee," as it is the only word that doesn't involve a two-party transaction and serves as a counterexample to the generalization in the passage.