Bunuel
Real estate agent: Upon selling a home, the sellers are legally entitled to remove any items that are not permanent fixtures. Legally, large appliances like dishwashers are not permanent fixtures. However, since many prospective buyers of the home are likely to assume that large appliances in the home would be included with its purchase, sellers who will be keeping the appliances are morally obliged either to remove them before showing the home or to indicate in some other way that the appliances are not included.
Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the real estate agent’s argumentation?
(A) If a home’s sellers will be keeping any belongings that prospective buyers of the home might assume would be included with the purchase of the home, the sellers are morally obliged to indicate clearly that those belongings are not included.
(B) A home’s sellers are morally obliged to ensure that prospective buyers of the home do not assume that any large appliances are permanent fixtures in the home.
(C) A home’s sellers are morally obliged to include with the sale of the home at least some of the appliances that are not permanent fixtures but were in the home when it was shown to prospective buyers.
(D) A home’s sellers are morally obliged not to deliberately mislead any prospective buyers of their home about which belongings are included with the sale of the home and which are not.
(E) If a home’s sellers have indicated in some way that a large appliance is included with the home’s purchase, then they are morally obliged not to remove that appliance after showing the home.
EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT
Wow. The real estate agent hoists a giant red flag when she says that someone is “morally obliged” to do something. This should piss you off. Morally obliged?
Morally obliged?!?! According to whose morals? Since when is the real estate agent the arbiter of what is moral and what is not?
We’re asked to help to justify the real estate agent’s argumentation. This is like a Sufficient Assumption question, or what you might think of as a “super-strengthen” question. Our task is to switch teams and be the attorney for the dumbass real estate agent. To help prove her ridiculous assertion that one is
morally obliged to do one thing or another, we definitely need a rule that says something about moral obligation. That much we know for sure. The correct answer has to be something like, “Sellers are morally obliged not to let their prospective buyers be misled.” Let’s see.
A) My problem with this answer is that the agent had said it’s okay to remove the item from the house before selling. Is
removing the item the same thing as “indicating clearly” that they won’t be included? Maybe it is, which would make this a decent answer. But I’m not 100 percent comfortable with that. So let’s see if we can find something better.
B) The problem with this answer is that it ignores the high probability that some large appliances are going to be included with the home when it is sold. Like the fancy indoor grill that’s built into your granite countertop kitchen island? Come on now. That’s a permanent fixture. You couldn’t physically remove it even if the buyer
weren’t entitled to it. Either way, you’re simply not taking that thing with you when you leave. If Answer B were the rule, you’d have to tell your buyers that they can’t assume they are getting the grill, even when they actually
are getting the grill. That’s not the point of the argument, so this isn’t right.
C) No way. The point of the argument is not, “You have to leave some of your stuff behind.”
D) It’s not about
deliberately misleading. It’s about not passively letting them be misled. Answer D would permit you to leave a large appliance in place, without labeling it, as long as you weren’t
deliberately misleading the buyer into thinking they were getting the fridge, then taking it with you when you leave. The agent’s rules wouldn’t allow that. So A was better.
E) Well, no. Sure, the agent would probably also not be cool with a seller specifically saying, “Yep, you’re getting this hot tub!” and then removing the tub under cover of darkness after the sale went through. But that’s not what the argument was about. It was about it being morally unacceptable to let your buyers
assume they were getting something that they’re not going to get.
I didn’t love A at first, but it did the best job of matching up with the agent’s conclusion. So that’s our answer.