Single choice · #555
A colleague advises you: "I bought an apartment in Linjiang New District two years ago and made a 40% profit. You should also invest the money you've saved for your wedding in the same neighborhood—the apartments are identical, and our incomes are similar." You want to use the four-step method to evaluate this argument. Which of the following identifies a key difference that would change the conclusion?
Show answer & explanation
Answer: A
- AThe two buyers face different housing price levels, loan costs, and market supply-demand conditions at the time of purchase, which directly affects whether buying in the same neighborhood now will also yield gains.✓ Correct. The conclusion to be proven is 'buying in the same neighborhood now will also appreciate.' The factors that directly determine this outcome are the price level, financing costs, and market supply-demand at the time of purchase—these are key differences that would change the result.
- BThe two chose different unit layouts and floors, so the apartments are not exactly identical, and therefore the analogy is entirely invalid.✗ Wrong. This treats differences that have little bearing on the investment conclusion (layout and floor mainly affect living comfort) as if they were crucial, and then uses them to reject the analogy outright. This corresponds to the misconception that 'any difference is a key difference.'
- CThe same neighborhood, location, and identical appearance are the strongest similarities and suffice to prove the conclusion must hold.✗ Wrong. This uses superficial physical and locational similarities to support a 'must' conclusion. Analogical conclusions are only probable, and their reliability depends on structurally relevant similarities, not on whether the buildings look alike.
- DSimilar incomes indicate similar purchasing power, and this single similarity alone guarantees that you will get the same level of investment return.✗ Wrong. This treats 'similar incomes'—a similarity irrelevant to real estate price trends—as a guarantee of returns, confusing purchasing-power similarity with market-outcome similarity. It uses an irrelevant similarity to endorse the conclusion.
Explanation:First, clarify what the colleague wants to prove: buying the same property now will yield similar appreciation. The structurally relevant aspects for price trends are the housing price level, financing costs, and market supply-demand at the time of purchase—these changes directly affect the outcome. Therefore, the option that points out differences in timing and market conditions identifies the key difference. The same appearance and location are superficial similarities; similar incomes are irrelevant to price trends; and while unit layout and floor are differences, they have little impact on the price trend of properties in the same neighborhood, and the existence of differences does not warrant rejecting the analogy entirely.