扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / OG2016-CR-113
Although the discount stores in Goreville's central shopping district are expected to close within five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long. In the five years since the opening of Colson's, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete with Colson's.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
Many customers of Colson's are expected to do less shopping there than they did before the SpendLess store opened.
Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since Colson's opened have been discount stores.
At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it ever had.
Over the course of the next five years, it is expected that Goreville's population will grow at a faster rate than it has for the past several decades.
Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not available at either SpendLess or Colson's.
情景：虽然由于刚开业的SpendLess折扣店的竞争，Goreville中心地段的折扣店将在5年内关门，但这些地方不会空着。从非折扣店Colson开业起的5年内，每个关门的店铺处都有一个新店会开张。
推理：由于前提和结论讨论的事件相同，所以本题为类比推理。推理结构为：
前提：Colson倒闭店之后位置没空着。
结论：SpendLess倒闭店之后位置也不会空着。
选题方式：类比推理一共具有两个评估方向，要么提到Colson或SpendLess，要么给出与这两个案例相平行等价的案例C。
选项分析：
A选项：Colson的顾客现在在Colson购买的东西比SpendLess开业前更少了。本选项提及了两个类比对象，但是其和结论的相关性不大。
B选项：Correct. 在Colson开业之后开的店中，开起来的店都是折扣店。本选项指出了类比对象的区别，即，以前能不空着是因为可以开折扣店，现在开折扣店已经没用了。属于CQ1：相似性问题。
C选项：目前，商业中心的店铺数量跟以前一样多。本选项给出了类比对象的相似点，只能加强推理。
D选项：接下来的5年，Goreville的人口增长率将会比之前的十几年增加。如果人口增加，那么商铺更加不会空着了。
E选项：很多中心区商店的商品在SpendLes或Colson店都买不到。本选项没有提及类比对象的不同点。
注意原文时态，第一个例子是将来时，表示的预期的，是需要weaken的。第二个例子是完成时，是已经发生的事实，没法weaken
所以非折扣店是例子，折扣店是作者的推论
本题在于相似性问题（类比对象不同），S是折扣店，C是正价店；我们已知S周围倒闭的都是折扣店，但不知C周围倒闭的是什么店。 因此，很有可能C周围的是折扣店，它们和C互补，商家认为低价还是有商机，所以一直有人在C旁边开折扣店（B点出了这一点）； 而S就不一样了，S自己是打折店，周围开的也是打折店，它们是同类竞争的关系，之后也不太可能有人在S旁边再开折扣店了。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论