Quote:
Originally Posted by LonghornDub
Equating strength with "durability," for one, is pretty suspect. To the extent it's true at all, it's probably true only as to durability against mechanical ailments (e.g., being strong could make you less likely to strain a muscle, tear a ligament, etc.).
I can't speak for you, but those things are pretty far down my list of ailments I'd like durability against.
|
I think your definition of strength function is different from mine. Can't speak for the multitudes but, anyway... Muscle is a function of strength. The stronger a muscle, the better that muscle is at working the joint it's operating. (after all that is what a muscle does, right?). That applies to everything you do.
Durability is more beneficial than you give credit towards. You can think of muscle as a coat of armor that protects you from life's torments. I have a friend who was in a motor cycle accident. He's a very strong and muscular dude. The doctor said besides the helmet, his muscular stature saved him from a lot worse that could have happened.
It's one thing to be defensive about your beliefs of how being fit is defined which dictates your plan. It's another to not acknowledge the benefits of being strong.