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

Audiologist: What is often considered age-related hearing loss is really the accumulated damage of long-term exposure to loud noise. This is demonstrated by studies of remote populations, who have little exposure to loud noise. These studies found that age-related hearing loss in these populations was limited or nonexistent.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The audiologist hypothesizes that age-related hearing loss is actually caused by long-term exposure to loud noise, rather than by age itself. He supports this by citing studies of remote populations with little exposure to loud noise and no significant age-related hearing loss.

Notable Assumptions
The audiologist assumes that the studies of remote populations can be generalized to apply to all people. He also assumes that long-term exposure to loud noise is the only major cause of age-related hearing loss, and that the lack of such exposure is the only reason remote populations don't have age-related hearing loss. He overlooks any other factors that may contribute to the presence of absence age-related hearing loss.

A
Ancient medical texts describe methods of treating hearing loss.
We have no connection between the remote populations in the studies and the source of these “ancient medical texts.” But even if we did, the audiologist doesn’t claim that the remote populations have no hearing loss at all, just that they don’t have age-related hearing loss.
B
Among remote populations, those people who lived for several years in urban areas show more age-related hearing loss than those who have always lived in remote areas.
This strengthens the hypothesis that age-related hearing loss is caused by exposure to loud noise. The fact that people from remote populations had more hearing loss after living in cities suggests that the noise in cities, not another factor, likely caused the hearing loss.
C
Those who live in urban areas typically become so accustomed to low-level background noise that they are unaware they are hearing it.
The argument addresses long-term exposure to “loud noise,” not “low-level background noise.” Even so, whether or not someone is aware of noise exposure doesn't change its effect on that person’s hearing.
D
Age-related hearing loss can make it difficult for people to participate in conversations that occur in social settings with more than two or three people.
The audiologist only addresses the cause of age-related hearing loss. He doesn’t discuss any consequences of age-related hearing loss.
E
Those who work in environments in which they are regularly exposed to loud noise tend not to wear ear protection unless they are required to.
(E) tells us nothing about the amount of hearing loss experienced by people who are regularly exposed to loud noise and choose not to wear ear protection. Thus, it has not impact on the audiologist’s argument either way.

2 comments