OG12-104，请指导

Although the discount stores  in Goreville's central shopping district are expected to close wihtin 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 deparment store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shoping district  that closed because it could not compete with Colson's.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

B.Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping distric since Colson's opened have been discount stores.

我没看懂题目什么意思有哪位nn指导下~~

首先理清哪句是原因 哪句是结论

第一句 Although the discount stores  in Goreville's central shopping district are expected to close wihtin five years as a result of competition from a Spendless discount department store that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long. will 表示作者的argument 意思：五年内竞争不过S店的折扣店都会倒闭，但这些倒闭店的地方不会空缺太久

第二句 In the five years since the opening of Colson's, a nondiscount deparment store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shoping district  that closed because it could not compete with Colson's.现在完成时表事实，这一句就是作者得到第一句结论的原因 意思：自非折扣店C店开店以来，每一个竞争不过C店而倒闭的店的地方都会有新的店出现

作者用类比推出结论

weaken:削弱原因：在竞争不过C店而倒闭的地方新开的不是非折扣店，而是折扣店

我这样理解的 不晓得你认同不

脑浆都想出来了，才想明白。原因：倒闭一个竞争力弱的店，开一个新店；结论：不会空位，即倒闭一个打折店，就会开新店。

驳斥：开得新店都是打折店

原因里面提到Colson's是非打折的，而打折店可以竞争过非打折的，所以可以开新店；现在的情况是：打折店竞争不过一个打折更厉害的店，所以倒闭，那么不会有人再开打折店了，因为开了也竞争不过这家更厉害的店。

结论：打折店close，因为有G竞争，但还会开

原因：不打折店close，因为有S竞争，但还是开了

类比，下面的原因发生的事情，会在上面的结论中重复发生

B，他因

（大概这么理解，我也是半迷糊中……）

打折店可以竞争过非打折的, 这个说法在题目中没有依据

属于常识吗...？

如果真按常识，一般discount shop的东西都比较inferior，和non discount shop target在不同的customer...

对此题还是不懂，请教NN~

对类比题削弱就是找两者不同之处 这个是没有异议的

但在这里两者的不同还没有显示出来

C店出现--》旁边的店倒闭--》倒闭店址有新折扣店开

S店出现--》旁边的店倒闭--------------》推断店址也会有新店开

这里暗含了一个assumption，折扣店的竞争力比非折扣店强。所以我才回复这个assumption是否属于一个常识？

OG12有一句很关键的解释：If the stores that were driven out by Colson's were replaced mostly by discount stores, that suggests that the stores were replaced because of a need that no longer exists after the opening of SpendLess.

觉得很多逻辑题需要做题人自己去做一些假设，或者限定，但这个度很难把握...

同意楼上的。类比题削弱就打断类比，指出类比物有差别不可类比。