Passage Summary: Lance says all rules have exceptions; Frank points out that if that's true, Lance's own rule must have an exception, making it false.

Conclusion: Lance's claim that every general rule has an exception is logically untenable and must be rejected.

Reasoning: If Lance's rule is true, then as a general rule itself, it must have an exception—meaning there is a rule with no exception, which contradicts the original claim.

Analysis: Frank is using a self-refutation strategy. He takes Lance's claim and applies it to itself to show it leads to a logical contradiction. This is a very common LSAT maneuver where a speaker demonstrates that a statement is internally inconsistent or self-defeating. Focus on how Frank uses the internal logic of the claim to dismantle it.