关于HELR类比推理的一点疑问

bellausa

[ 本帖最后由 bellausa 于 2013-11-15 12:11 编辑 ]\n\n
做题发现很多helr所说的类比推理却是这样的模式：
给出A，B相似点，给出A，B不同结果，并给出是A，B的某不同点造成的。
问削弱加强。。。
做题发现这种题型用果因推理就可以做了，举例：
prep08第一部分73题
Advertisement:  Ten years ago, the Cormond Hotel's lobby was carpeted with Duratex carpet while the lobby of a nearby hotel was being carpeted with our competitor's most durable carpet.  Today, after a decade in which the two hotels have had similar amounts of foot traffic through their lobbies, that other hotel is having to replace the worn-out carpeting near its lobby entrances, whereas the Cormond's Duratex carpeting has years of wear left in it.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the advertisement's evidence for concluding that Duratex carpet is more durable than the carpet of its competitor?
A. The lobby of the Cormond Hotel has five different entrances, but the lobby of the other hotel has only two.
B. The carpet of the Cormond Hotel's lobby is not the most durable carpet that Duratex manufactures.
C. The other hotel has a popular restaurant that can be reached from outside without walking through the hotel lobby.
D. The carpet that is being used to replace carpeting near the other hotel's lobby entrances is not Duratex carpet.
E. There is a third hotel near the other two that has not replaced the Duratex carpet in its lobby for more than 15 years.
文中给出C Hotel和N Hotel的相同点：都用carpet，similar foot
给出不同结果：N Hotel的 carpet worn out
给出原因：C Hotel用的carpet质量更好。
问削弱。
解题：直接进入果因模式，找他因或者因果联系不就好了吗？答案就是他因。。。发现大部分此种题型都可以直接果因模式啊，求大家批判。。。。