3 ms·
As someone who is currently trying to run all 450 miles of the London Underground for charity I think that the greatest challenge of running is mental and not p
by sw007 15y ago
As someone who is currently trying to run all 450 miles of the London Underground for charity I think that the greatest challenge of running is mental and not physical. Whilst I take his point we are built better to run long distances - I would love for there to be some analysis on the mental side of running. An animal may not be able to run 26 miles for physical reasons but I firmly believe humans can only run 26 miles if they have cause. If they are inspired. If they are so inspired that giving up is not an option. There is not a hope in hell I could run the distances I am running without being massively inspired by the cause I am running for - that for me is what sets us apart.
- defrost 15y agoNot so sure about having to have a deep compelling cause, the first time Cliff Young fronted up for an endurance race I believe it was because he just wanted to have a go. My father, now 77, has walked a 1000km track pretty much every year for the past decade now. He doesn't run but he does carry a pack and sets a pretty mean pace. His initial motivation was the death of my mother and the hole it left in his life, now it's just another of his regular activities. Cliff Young: http://www.elitefeet.com/the-legend-of-cliff-young http://www.elitefeet.com/the-legend-of-cliff-young
- bad_user 15y agoAccording to the article, humans developed these abilities for hunting. I'm pretty sure that having an empty stomach and starving children at home is a really good and inspiring reason. And the difference between these early humans and animals might have been the much stronger social structure we have. As noted by other people in this thread, consider how pregnancies take 9 months, or the years it takes a newborn to reach maturity. So most probably, early humans that took care of their family better, were most apt to survive.