I think this is a pretty solid analogy but I look at the metaphor this way - people used to get strong naturally because they had to do physical labor. Because we invented things like the forklift we had to invent things like weightlifting to get strong instead. You can still get strong, you just need to be more deliberate about it. It doesn't mean shouldn't also use a forklift, which is its own distinct skill you also need to learn.

It's not a perfect analogy though because in this case it's more like automated driving - you should still learn to drive because the autodriver isn't perfect and you need to be ready to take the wheel, but that means deliberate, separate practice at learning to drive.

▲

WorldMaker 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> people used to get strong naturally because they had to do physical labor

I think that's a bit of a myth. The Greeks and Romans had weightlifting and boxing gyms, but no forklifts. Many of the most renowned Romans in the original form of the Olympics and in Boxing were Roman Senators with the wealth and free time to lift weights and box and wrestle. One of the things that we know about the famous philosopher Plato was that Plato was essentially a nickname from wrestling (meaning "Broad") as a first career (somewhat like Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, which adds a fun twist to reading Socratic Dialogs or thinking about relationships as "platonic").

Arguably the "meritocratic ideal" of the Gladiator arena was that even "blue collar" Romans could compete and maybe survive. But even the stories that survive of that, few did.

There may be a lesson in that myth, too, that the people that succeed in some sports often aren't the people doing physical labor because they must do physical labor (for a job), they are the ones intentionally practicing it in the ways to do well in sports.

▲

port11 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I can’t attest to the entire past, but my ancestors on both sides were farmers or construction workers. They were fit. Heck, my dad has a beer gut at 65 but still has arm muscles that’ll put me to shame — someone lifting weights once a week. I’ve had to do construction for a summer and everyone there was in good shape.

They don’t go to the gym, they don’t have the energy; the job shapes you. More or less the same for the farmers in the family.

Perhaps this was less so in the industrial era because of poor nutrition (source: Bill Bryson, hopefully well researched). Hunter gatherer cultures that we still study today have tremendous fitness (Daniel Lieberman).

▲

hn_acc1 4 hours ago | parent [-]

My dad was a machinist, apprenticed in Germany after WW2. Always somewhat overweight (5'9", 225 lbs during his "peak" years), but he could lift guys up by their belt with one arm, and pick up and move 200+ lb metal billets when he got too impatient to wheel the crane over. Even at 85 now, he's probably stronger in his arms than most 60 year olds. But I'm also not saying ALL of his co-workers were that strong, either.

▲

foobarchu 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Takes mass to move mass. Most of the strongest people in the world look "fat" and usually have a hefty gut. Strong and jacked are orthogonal characteristics.

	▲	jedwards1211 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I know what you mean, but from a physics perspective, no, it just takes force to move mass. More mass will generate more downward force due to gravity, and more force in other directions due to momentum once it’s moving, but there’s more to generating force than just mass. I’m not a kinesiologist but I would think how much force muscles generate depends on the amount and size of the fibers (mass) but also on their contractive efficiency and the amount of energy they can obtain and employ to contract (not necessarily proportional to mass, involves cardiovascular fitness)

▲

spondyl an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The Greeks and Romans had weightlifting and boxing gyms, but no forklifts.

We may not have any evidence that they had forklifts but we also can't rule out the possibility entirely :)

▲

thaumasiotes 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> I think that's a bit of a myth.

Why do you think that? It's definitely true. You can observe it today if you want to visit a country where peasants are still common.

From Bret Devereaux's recent series on Greek hoplites:

> Now traditionally, the zeugitai were regarded as the ‘hoplite class’ and that is sometimes supposed to be the source of their name

> but what van Wees is working out is that although the zeugitai are supposed to be the core of the citizen polity (the thetes have limited political participation) there simply cannot be that many of them because the minimum farm necessary to produce 200 medimnoi of grain is going to be around 7.5 ha or roughly 18 acres which is – by peasant standards – an enormous farm, well into ‘rich peasant’ territory.

> Of course with such large farms there can’t be all that many zeugitai and indeed there don’t seem to have been. In van Wees’ model, the zeugitai-and-up classes never supply even half of the number of hoplites we see Athens deploy

> Instead, under most conditions the majority of hoplites are thetes, pulled from the wealthiest stratum of that class (van Wees figures these fellows probably have farms in the range of ~3 ha or so, so c. 7.5 acres). Those thetes make up the majority of hoplites on the field but do not enjoy the political privileges of the ‘hoplite class.’

> And pushing against the ‘polis-of-rentier-elites’ model, we often also find Greek sources remarking that these fellows, “wiry and sunburnt” (Plato Republic 556cd, trans. van Wees), make the best soldiers because they’re more physically fit and more inured to hardship – because unlike the wealthy hoplites they actually have to work.

( https://acoup.blog/2026/01/09/collections-hoplite-wars-part-... )

---

> Many of the most renowned Romans in the original form of the Olympics and in Boxing were Roman Senators

In the original form of the Olympics, a Roman senator would have been ineligible to compete, since the Olympics was open only to Greeks.

	▲	tracerbulletx 34 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I think he was saying upper classes that didn't do much physical labor have existed since at least classical era and needed to do some kind of physical training to maintain strength?
	▲	Terr_ an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Reaper Man, by Terry Pratchett: > The ability of skinny old ladies to carry huge loads is phenomenal. Studies have shown that an ant can carry one hundred times its own weight, but there is no known limit to the lifting power of the average tiny eighty-year-old Spanish peasant grandmother.

▲

thesz 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Weightlifting and weight training was invented long before forklifts. Even levers were not properly understood back then.

My favorite historic example of typical modern hypertrophy-specific training is the training of Milo of Croton [1]. By legend, his father gifted him with the calf and asked daily "what is your calf, how does it do? bring it here to look at him" which Milo did. As calf's weight grew, so did Milo's strength.

This is application of external resistance (calf) and progressive overload (growing calf) principles at work.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milo_of_Croton

Milo lived before Archimedes.

▲

aaronbrethorst 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Dad needs to respect that we need rest days.

▲

thesz 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Bulgarian Method does not have rest days: https://www.mashelite.com/the-bulgarian-method-is-worth-a-lo...

Alexander Zass (Iron Samson) also trained each day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Zass

"He was taken as a prisoner of war four times, but managed to escape each time. As a prisoner, he pushed and pulled his cell bars as part of strength training, which was cited as an example of the effectiveness of isometrics. At least one of his escapes involved him 'breaking chains and bending bars'."

Rest days are overrated. ;)

▲

hxugufjfjf 6 hours ago | parent [-]

They are until you get injured, burned out or both and stop training all together.

	▲	thesz 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If you do a single set of half of exercises you need to train each day of the week, rotating these halves, you get 3 and a half sets of each exercise per week. Training volume of Bulgarian Method is not much bigger than that of regular training splits like Sheiko or something like that, if bigger at all. What is more frequent is the stimulation of muscles and nervous system paths and BM adapts to that - one does high percentage of one's current max, essentially, one is training with what is available to one's body at the time. Also, ultra long distance runners regenerate cartilages: https://ryortho.com/2015/12/what-ultra-long-distance-runners... Our bodies are amazing.

▲

epiccoleman 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> what is your calf, how does it do?

... it's a calf, dad, just like yesterday

▲

chairmansteve 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Milo might have had slaves, the forklifts of his time....

▲

gadflyinyoureye 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I looked up the weight of cows from that era. Only about 400 lbs. Seems doable.

▲

hennell 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>if the goal is to build up your own strength I think you missed this line. If the goal is just to move weights or lift the most - forklift away. If you want to learn to use a forklift, drive on and best of luck. But if you're trying to get stronger the forklift will not help that goal.

Like many educational tests the outcome is not the point - doing the work to get there is. If you're asked to code fizz buzz it's not because the teacher needs you to solve fizz buzz for them, it's because you will learn things while you make it. Ai, copying stack overflow, using someone's code from last year, it all solves the problem while missing the purpose of the exercise. You're not learning - and presumably that is your goal.