One reason swimming immediately after eating is thought to be dangerous is that it could cause muscle cramps. But there is no reason to believe this. Muscle cramps are usually caused by muscle fatigue and dehydration, which are unrelated to eating. Reduced blood flow to muscles during digestion might also be a cause, though this is disputed. In any case, not enough blood goes to the stomach to aid in digestion after a meal to reduce blood flow to muscles.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that there’s no reason to believe that swimming immediately after eating causes muscle cramps. This is because muscle cramps are caused by either muscle fatigue and dehydration or by reduced blood flow to the muscles. Muscle fatigue and dehydration aren’t related to eating, and eating doesn’t cause enough reduced blood flow to the muscles to cause cramps.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s counter to the belief that swimming immediately after eating causes muscle cramps: “[T]here is no reason to believe this.”

A
Swimming immediately after eating is not dangerous.
This twists the author’s conclusion, which is only that swimming after eating doesn’t cause muscle cramps. The author never suggests swimming after eating is not dangerous for some other reason besides muscle cramps.
B
Reduced blood flow to muscles is not a cause of muscle cramps.
The author acknowledges that reduced blood flow might not be a cause of muscle cramps, but never states that it is definitely not a cause.
C
There is no reason to believe that swimming immediately after eating causes muscle cramps.
This is a paraphrase of the conclusion.
D
Blood going to the stomach to aid in digestion after a meal is not a cause of muscle cramps.
This is a premise.
E
Blood going to the stomach to aid in digestion after a meal would not reduce blood flow to the muscles.
This relates only to a premise. And, it twists what that premise actually says. The author states that there’s not enough blood that goes to the stomach during digestion to reduce blood flow to muscles. This doesn’t mean that there’s no reduced blood flow to muscles at all.

Comment on this

Flores: The behavior of the character Gawain in Malory’s Le Morte D’Arthur fluctuates radically and without apparent reason between heroic and criminal. Malory’s portrayal of Gawain is incoherent in this way because Malory based his book on earlier sources from different eras, and Gawain’s role changed over time.

Piro: While the variation you mention might stem from the different times that Malory’s sources were written, in Malory’s work Gawain’s heroic behavior occurs during crises, but his criminal behavior occurs during stable periods, when there is more room to break the rules.

Speaker 1 Summary

Flores claims that Malory depicts the character Gawain in a way that is incoherent. How so? Because Gawain’s behavior swings randomly between heroic and criminal. Flores further supports this incoherence by explaining that Malory used sources from different time periods, where Gawain’s role was different.

Speaker 2 Summary

Piro’s argument is directed at the implied conclusion that Malory’s depiction of Gawain is not incoherent, despite Malory’s use of different sources. As support, Piro says that Gawain acts heroically during crises but criminally during periods of stability. A narrative explanation for Gawain’s varying behavior makes the depiction more coherent.

Objective

We want to find a point of disagreement between Flores and Piro. They disagree about whether Malory’s depiction of Gawain is incoherent.

A
Malory’s portrayal of the character of Gawain in Le Morte D’Arthur is incoherent

Flores agrees but Piro disagrees, making this the disagreement. Flores’s main conclusion is that Malory’s portrayal of Gawain is incoherent. On the other hand, Piro provides an explanation for Gawain’s behavior, implying that the depiction is coherent.

B
the sources for Malory’s characterization of Gawain were written in different eras

Like (C) and (E), Flores agrees with this and Piro doesn’t express an opinion. Piro acknowledges that this might be true, but doesn’t really commit either way.

C
Gawain was portrayed as a hero in some of the stories that Malory used as sources

Like (B) and (E), Flores agrees, but Piro neither agrees nor disagrees. Flores says that Gawain swings from hero to criminal because of how different sources depicted him, implying that he was sometimes depicted as a hero. Piro is ambivalent about Flores’s claims about sources.

D
the behavior of Gawain in Le Morte D’Arthur alternates between heroic and criminal

Both speakers agree with this. Their disagreement is about whether Gawain’s alternating behavior amounts to an incoherent depiction of the character, or if it instead has a good explanation within the story.

E
the sources for Malory’s characterization of Gawain vary significantly regarding the role played by Gawain

Like (B) and (C), Flores agrees but Piro has no opinion. The only thing Piro says about Malory’s sources is that Flores might be correct: in other words, the sources might vary regarding Gawain’s role. This still leaves open the possibility that the sources don’t actually vary.


2 comments