11 ms·
Hm. I'm not sure I agree. There aren't many humans that can just turn their necks around like an owl. It's not a range of motion that the human body is really c
by muninn_ 9y ago
Hm. I'm not sure I agree. There aren't many humans that can just turn their necks around like an owl. It's not a range of motion that the human body is really capable of, so there may be some people who can twist their neck further than others, but we basically have the same range of motion or even potential same range of motion. In that respect, humans are "designed" to only have a certain range of motion, which kind of implies some sort of genetic specification. Otherwise if we did not have a mostly uniform range of motion (when taken as a whole) we'd have noodle people and owl people and people that could kick the back of their head or something. But we don't.
- tgb 9y agoDid you view the link I provided in my first reply? I think it shows that there are substantial differences, enough to make a statement that we all have the same design range of motion either meaningless or wrong. Edit: to illustrate why I think it's so wrong to make such a statment, let's consider one of its implications. If we all have the same design range of motion and all differences are caused my muscle imbalances, then when I see someone do something I can't do, I have to conclude that the difference is a muscle imbalance. I wouldn't be surprised if this was the difference most of the time, but I think it's clearly false to say that's the correct conclusion all of the time. So I would sometimes be wrongly concluding that muscle balances are my problem and might wrongly attempt motions that I'm incapable of or waste time on exercises that can't help.