"Fighting may have shaped evolution of the human hand"

[TeddyRoosevelt]

While it could certainly use a good deal more substantiation via research, I figured some of you might like to read it given the occasional discussions of the human fist around here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20790294

 

[Edgar Allan Hoe]

The fighting aspects of a hand are already found in Apes. I think our hands are the way they are due to work functionality rather than fighting.

You don't need opposable thumbs to box, you need them to use tools. That's probably Human hands are much more refined to use them where as Apes don't have that natural fluidity.

 

[Count Zero]

So evolution lets us bang ?

 

[Lifer]

The fighting aspects of a hand are already found in Apes. I think our hands are the way they are due to work functionality rather than fighting.

You don't need opposable thumbs to box, you need them to use tools. That's probably Human hands are much more refined to use them where as Apes don't have that natural fluidity.

Chuck Liddell disagrees.

 

[Phlog]

The fighting aspects of a hand are already found in Apes. I think our hands are the way they are due to work functionality rather than fighting.

You don't need opposable thumbs to box, you need them to use tools. That's probably Human hands are much more refined to use them where as Apes don't have that natural fluidity.

Your comment suggests you did not read the article.

There aren't really many ways to further research this. One can only theorize of the evolutionary reason for evolved characteristics, what would be needed to improve the evidence would be some amazing computer modelling to project selective forces, very challenging! Essentially what they've provided is a best guess and it seems pretty rational. It's amusing to think the early humans that punched won fights and passed on genes, that boxing is an initial trait for our species, a defining characteristic.

More generally: Anyone who suggests we havn't evolved to fight is ignoring not only the fact that we have and do, but also, the number of biological adaptions males have that improve fighting prowess to the detriment of the individuals longterm health or survival.

 

[SummerStriker]

So the total force is the same between fists and palm, but the force per area is higher on the fist?

Is the ability to knock someone out not different with a fist then, compared to palm strikes? Just like the head gear prevents tissue damage but not concussion, can you ko a person with palm just the same?

 

[Phlog]

Thats an interesting question, if one considers the ko to be caused by the general force applied rather than the local tissue damage caused by the knuckle; could be your right. Also it would be easier to create rotation in the skull with a slap rather than a hook, more purchase/friction and a lower frequency impact, one could argue it may be more effective.

There must be a reason why the fist was positively selected for tho, I'm guessing that the local tissue damage wins out in dominance display violence. Or that the open palm is just less damaging over all, even with the slightly improved (maybe) KO mechanics.

Could a lead hand slap open up guard for the straight in mma? It would be long range and could fake off a jab or somit?

 

[Phlog]

Double post

 

[SummerStriker]

Some of my self defense instructors advocate the palm strike to the head instead of the fist, afraid of breaking their hand. I never really agreed with it. I always thought some fist conditioning worked wonders along with lots of small glove sparring was better.

It isn't just that I like the fist better, but I think the extra 3 or 4 inches if reach are important. Besides that, if you are worried about injuries, I wouldn't want to hit with the top of my palm or fingers and jam my wrist back.

 

[Sinister]

The fighting aspects of a hand are already found in Apes. I think our hands are the way they are due to work functionality rather than fighting.

You don't need opposable thumbs to box, you need them to use tools. That's probably Human hands are much more refined to use them where as Apes don't have that natural fluidity.

Here's an experiment:

Try boxing or fighting anywhere with your thumbs out. Let us know how well those thumbs fare.

 

[thirteen]

Prehistoric man didn't fuck around with punches.
He'd grab a huge rock/big stick/spear etc and bash the other guy's brains in.

Hands aren't perfect for striking (small bones etc damage easily) - but they great for firmly grasping rocks etc and using them to bash someone's brains out.

 

[Charlitos1988]

Prehistoric man didn't fuck around with punches.
He'd grab a huge rock/big stick/spear etc and bash the other guy's brains in.

Hands aren't perfect for striking (small bones etc damage easily) - but they great for firmly grasping rocks etc and using them to bash someone's brains out.[/
QUOTE]

I agree!

if humans have hands genetically made for punching there shouldn't exists things like broken knuckles even on top athletes with good hands and technique at punching...

so for normal people is worse! they will break their unconditioned knuckles!

 

[thirteen]

I honestly think that as far as the hand is concerned - Evolution developed along the line of fine motor skills.

 

[Sinister]

Prehistoric man didn't fuck around with punches.
He'd grab a huge rock/big stick/spear etc and bash the other guy's brains in.

Hands aren't perfect for striking (small bones etc damage easily) - but they great for firmly grasping rocks etc and using them to bash someone's brains out.

I don't think you're thinking in complete contexts here. Fighting isn't always about just killing the other guy. Many animals have contests to measure dominance that don't always involve killing. Some are akin to wrestling, jousting, etc. Can they be killed? Sure, but that's not always the objective.

I also think it's a tad naive to assume there would ALWAYS be a weapon handy. At least one large enough to make that huge of a difference. If that were the case then why would people fight with their fists today when there's arguably more weapons around than ever? Yet you still always see people in street fights attempting to throw blows with their hands. It's in human nature to almost always think one can fight, or fantasize about it. That's what drives people into this Gym off the streets wanting to test themselves. It's a primal instinct that's always existed.

 

[thewhiteSRR]

I agree!

if humans have hands genetically made for punching there shouldn't exists things like broken knuckles even on top athletes with good hands and technique at punching...

so for normal people is worse! they will break their unconditioned knuckles!

that's not how it works. Look at how thousands choke to death each year because of the shared opening of our esoph-agus(damn censor) and trachea . Evolution doesn't necessarily guarantee the perfect design, even if something happens to be advantageous.

 

[Sinister]

that's not how it works. Look at how thousands choke to death each year because of the shared opening of our esoph-agus(damn censor) and trachea . Evolution doesn't necessarily guarantee the perfect design, even if something happens to be advantageous.

Indeed, evolution is about survival, not necessarily perfection.

 

[thirteen]

that's not how it works. Look at how thousands choke to death each year because of the shared opening of our esoph-agus(damn censor) and trachea.

Evolution is kinda a compromise -
Humans (unlike chimps etc) have a descended larynx. It means that we can talk. It also means we can accidentally choke to death lol.

Anyway sorry for going OT.

 

[Jaxx]

I don't think you're thinking in complete contexts here. Fighting isn't always about just killing the other guy. Many animals have contests to measure dominance that don't always involve killing. Some are akin to wrestling, jousting, etc. Can they be killed? Sure, but that's not always the objective.

I also think it's a tad naive to assume there would ALWAYS be a weapon handy. At least one large enough to make that huge of a difference. If that were the case then why would people fight with their fists today when there's arguably more weapons around than ever? Yet you still always see people in street fights attempting to throw blows with their hands. It's in human nature to almost always think one can fight, or fantasize about it. That's what drives people into this Gym off the streets wanting to test themselves. It's a primal instinct that's always existed.

Damn...cracking post!

Cheers mate.

 

[Blackened]

Chuck Liddell disagrees.

Is that an eyepoke joke?

 

[Blackened]

I don't think you're thinking in complete contexts here. Fighting isn't always about just killing the other guy. Many animals have contests to measure dominance that don't always involve killing. Some are akin to wrestling, jousting, etc. Can they be killed? Sure, but that's not always the objective.

I also think it's a tad naive to assume there would ALWAYS be a weapon handy. At least one large enough to make that huge of a difference. If that were the case then why would people fight with their fists today when there's arguably more weapons around than ever? Yet you still always see people in street fights attempting to throw blows with their hands. It's in human nature to almost always think one can fight, or fantasize about it. That's what drives people into this Gym off the streets wanting to test themselves. It's a primal instinct that's always existed.

Makes sense reproductively. Any dude will attest dominance has quite a bit to do with mating. Mostly done with eye contact, so fighting seems to 'final option', except for play and goofing around. Then again, there are the Fedor esque guys that won't make eye contact with you but could still kick your ass.

Seems to me wrestling is a more natural form of dominance than striking. Striking just seems to be one of those things we figured out. Just my intuition.