Against Exercise (Mark Greif)
Where does the author tend to provide “easy” solutions or explanations? Where are the limits of such explanations?
I did not like how the writer did not state his actual reasons behind the statement of “our gym is better named a health club.” I believe Greif just goes into another point of exercise should be left in private without a valid explanation of the first argument.
How can the more constructive elements of Greif essay be redeemed, taken seriously, but also shown to have blind spots?
Greif mentions that the “gym resembles a voluntary hospital” he makes a very valid point. He gives strong examples that makes this argument serious by mentioning every machine is a part of tracking your