Pat Davidson PhD (exercise physiologist, ex-professor, addiction-recovery story) argues the fitness industry is in its 'Gilded Age' — skilled only through apprenticeship — and has built a 7-pillar algorithmic model to eliminate arbitrary exercise selection and standardize intelligent programming.
2
The core prescription framework: classify every exercise by movement pattern (13 archetypes), plane of motion (3), stance archetype (3), load zone (heavy/medium/light), velocity zone (fast/medium/slow), and duration — then match that matrix to the individual's goals with the least 'cost of doing business'.
3
Ground-contact is the master variable for exercise selection and progression: beginners get maximum-ground exercises (hack squats, machines) for safety and movement-quality learning; ground is systematically removed as competence grows toward the athlete's actual interaction profile with their sport.
4
Under Jacksonian dissolution, stress causes the nervous system to regress from modern human movement toward chimpanzee-like mechanics — the training goal is to introduce controlled stress while retaining the ability to return to a fully upright, stable human baseline.
Protocols
Concrete recipes — what, when, how much, and why
7 items
Begin every client on maximum-ground exercises regardless of goal
WhatStart all new training relationships with the highest-ground exercises available for the target movement pattern: machine-based options (hack squat, chest press machine, cable rows) before free weights; bilateral stance before unilateral; sagittal plane before frontal or transverse.
WhenAt intake of any new client and at any return from extended layoff or injury. As the default starting point regardless of age, fitness level, or stated goal.
DoseContinue high-ground exercises for as many sessions as needed until movement quality is consistent and stable; then systematically remove one ground element at a time.
For whomAll beginners and deconditioned individuals. Also appropriate for experienced athletes returning to a new movement pattern or coming back from injury.
WhyGround contact provides external stability that allows the nervous system to learn the movement pattern without managing a stability deficit simultaneously. The learning transfer to lower-ground variations is far cleaner than the reverse.
CaveatsAthletes whose sport demands low-ground interaction (skateboarding, gymnastics, diving) should progress toward low-ground variations more aggressively once baseline movement quality is established; keeping them on machines long-term would train the wrong ground-interaction profile.
Davidson's teaching analogy: you would not teach a child to shoot basketball by starting with a three-pointer. You start with a layup and master the fundamentals before moving away from the basket. The same progressive-complexity principle applies to ground interaction: give the biggest possible layup on day one, then systematically expand the challenge. This also means that the TRX and instability work ubiquitous in commercial gyms is often the wrong starting point — it removes ground before the person has demonstrated the baseline movement quality that would make low-ground training productive.
I step outside I exercise I say well what would I do if I had to teach a little kid how to shoot a basketball you know would I start with a 3 pointer way too hard I'm going to start with a layup and then if they can Master a layup I'll move a little bit further out.
Apply the pharmacology model to exercise selection: category then dose then titration then side-effect monitoring
WhatFor every exercise prescription, make the selection explicit across four dimensions: (1) which movement category (push, pull, hinge, squat, carry, rotation — from the 13-pattern taxonomy); (2) what dose (load zone, velocity zone, duration zone); (3) how the dose will change over time (progressive overload logic tied to clear markers); (4) what side effects to watch for (technical breakdown, joint irritation, excessive fatigue signals).
WhenAt program design and at each program review/update session.
For whomAny fitness provider designing programs. Also useful for self-coached athletes who want to audit whether their current program is actually systematic.
WhyThe pharmacology framing removes arbitrary decision making. A drug prescribed without category rationale, dose, titration plan, and side-effect monitoring is malpractice; an exercise prescribed without these elements is the equivalent.
The four-dimension framework mirrors the SOAP note structure in medicine: Subjective (goals, history), Objective (movement screen, capacities), Assessment (where on the ground/load/velocity matrix does this person sit), Plan (exercise selection with dose and progression logic). The difference from current practice: most trainers go directly from 'goal' to 'exercise' without the assessment and pharmacology-category steps. Davidson wants the category and dose to be explicit before the specific tool is chosen — because the category and dose describe the adaptation, while the specific tool is secondary.
If it's a drug you have to talk about you know is this a barbituate is this you know amphetamine like what exactly what category does this substance fit into and from there I have slightly different iterations of those drugs.
Also said
“Can I begin to identify a type of movement that gives me a very specific outcome and is very reliable in giving me that same outcome when dosed in an appropriate Manner and titrated from a dosing perspective to continue to give me the appropriate outcome and can I limit the side effects.”— The full pharmacology-model translation: specificity, dosing, titration, side-effect minimization — all applied to exercise.
Load range 30-85% of 1RM for muscle mass — ensure the intended muscle is the actual limiter
WhatSelect load within the 30-85% 1RM range for any muscle-mass goal. The specific percentage matters far less than the condition that the exercise ends near failure and that the target muscle group — not the spine, technique, or a less-trained stabilizer — is the limiting factor for terminating the set.
WhenFor any session targeting hypertrophy. Load selection should be revisited whenever the limiting factor shifts away from the target muscle.
Dose30-85% 1RM, working to near failure (leaving 0-2 reps in the tank on most sets). Volume prescription follows standard hypertrophy programming logic layered on top.
For whomGeneral population with aesthetic or health goals. The 30% lower end is particularly appropriate for beginners, injured individuals, or situations where joint loading must be minimized.
WhyResearch supports equivalent hypertrophy responses across the full 30-85% range when effort is high and reps are taken close to failure. The variation within this range is a dose-titration tool, not a binary correct/incorrect choice.
CaveatsNear-failure requirement is non-negotiable for the low end of the range (30-50%) to be effective — submaximal effort at low load produces almost no hypertrophic signal.
Davidson uses this wide range explicitly to select load based on what makes the target tissue the limiter for this person — not based on a fixed percentage. For a beginner squatting, 85% 1RM on a back squat will make their back the limiter before their legs. The correct move is to drop to a hack squat at 40-50% machine load where quads become the actual limiting factor — and that lower load is now the correctly prescribed dose, not a compromise.
I know from the research that I can have an equal muscle mass response in terms of the way that exercise feeds into that I can choose a load between 30 percent of the one rep max up to 85 percent and as long as I work hard and almost get to the point where I can't do any more reps I'm providing the drug that gives me the outcome that I'm looking for.
Use the squat-as-elevator / hinge-as-escalator test to diagnose and fix mixed-pattern breakdowns
WhatWhen evaluating a squat or hinge pattern, check whether the movement is genuinely vertical (elevator) or genuinely horizontal (escalator). If it is neither — if the person is simultaneously leaning forward AND down — the pattern is mixed and neither squat nor hinge adaptations are being trained efficiently.
WhenDuring movement screening and at any point in training where an athlete's squat or hinge pattern produces unexpected limiting factors (e.g., lower back fatigue on a supposed leg-day exercise).
For whomAnyone training compound lower body movements, particularly beginners and intermediate lifters who have not had technical coaching.
WhyThe squat and the hinge are categorically different motor patterns that train different tissues at different lengths. A mixed pattern delivers the same stimulus twice in slightly different doses — a 'dumb drug' that provides redundant stimulation without the specificity of either.
CaveatsA deadlift intentionally approximates a hinge (horizontal/escalator) by design — do not coach a deadlift to become more vertical. The correction is pattern-specific: squats should be made more vertical; hinges should be allowed to stay horizontal.
The elevator/escalator framing also predicts load-placement corrections: if the person's squat is collapsing into hinge territory (forward lean), moving the load in front of the body (goblet, front squat, hack squat) will restore the vertical pattern by counteracting the forward center-of-mass shift. This is both a diagnostic and a corrective tool in one framework.
When I think about a squat I want it to be vertical when I think about a hinge I want it to be horizontal a squat you're in the elevator not the escalator the hinge you're in the escalator not the elevator but most people are in both at the same time kind of thing.
Build training programs as narratives: letter to word to sentence to paragraph to book
WhatDesign every training program as a multi-level structure: exercise (letter) then workout (word) then weekly training string (sentence) then mesocycle (paragraph) then full program (book). Each level must be internally consistent and logically sequenced — not assembled arbitrarily session-to-session.
WhenAt program design and at every mesocycle review. The 'book' metaphor implies a known endpoint (goal) that informs the story being told.
For whomBoth coaches designing programs for clients and individuals designing their own training. Particularly important for intermediate and advanced trainees who have exhausted linear progression.
WhyHumans are storytelling creatures — motivation and adherence follow narrative coherence. A program that tells a story the person believes in generates more consistent effort over time than a technically optimal but narrative-incoherent program.
Davidson's full framing: 'Can we start with a pen light and can that pen light grow to a flashlight and can that flashlight grow to a headlight and can that headlight grow to a spotlight and can that spotlight become a stadium light which can grow to sunlight.' The training program should have this illumination metaphor built into it — starting small, building coherence, and growing the beam of the stimulus over time in a way that feels purposeful to the person living through it.
I'm looking to tell a story about you but it starts with an appropriate letter selection that I assemble into an appropriate word that I put into a reasonable sentence that becomes a stream and a directionality and a narrative that you can follow.
Evaluate movement standardization: does this person walk like a human or a chimp?
WhatAs a rapid global movement quality screen, observe the person walking and check for lateral lumbar lurching, inability to contain the trunk between the feet during forward locomotion, and loss of upright head carriage. These are the defining chimpanzee-on-two-feet patterns that signal Jacksonian dissolution and indicate that exercise selection needs to go higher-ground before progressing.
WhenAt initial movement assessment and periodically during training blocks where load or intensity has been significantly increased.
For whomAll populations. Particularly important for intermediate and advanced trainees where higher loads produce more stress-induced regression.
WhyJacksonian dissolution predicts that stress — including the stress of heavy exercise — will cause the nervous system to regress from modern human movement patterns toward evolutionarily older, less stable patterns. Detecting this regression early allows load and complexity to be adjusted before technique breakdowns accumulate into injury.
CaveatsSome chimpanzee-like mechanics are expected and appropriate under near-maximal loads (Davidson acknowledges a deadlift looks a lot like an ape). The criterion is return to baseline: can the person fully recover modern-human movement pattern after the set?
Davidson's criteria for a safe training progression: 'In some ways I want to see depending upon your goals particularly how far backwards down the evolutionary timeline can I shove you during training. I want to see that you understand the fundamentals first.' The key recovery criterion — can you come back to baseline after the set? — distinguishes productive stress from accumulated breakdown. If the person cannot fully return to upright human gait pattern between sets, the load is too high or the ground contact is too low for this stage of their development.
I always look at it like do you walk like a chimp. If I put the Chimp on two feet and when you walk watch a chimp walk on two feet it basically lurches back and forth side to side it's skeleton just it's like a drunk person or a penguin you know it just it laterally wobbles it's unable to contain the head and the trunk in between the feet during forward walking.
Specify movement category before tool — never start the exercise selection with equipment name
WhatWhen designing a session, begin by specifying the movement category (hinge, squat, push, pull, etc.), the plane of motion (sagittal, frontal, transverse), the stance archetype (bilateral, split, single-leg), and the dose zone (load x velocity x duration). Only after all of these are specified should a specific piece of equipment be selected.
WhenAt every program design session and every exercise substitution decision.
For whomFitness professionals and self-coached athletes who want to audit whether their program is systematic or Gilded-Age arbitrary.
WhyStarting with the equipment name produces arbitrary decisions that are defended emotionally rather than logically. Starting with the category produces decisions that are defensible, modifiable based on client response, and comparable across providers.
The example Davidson uses: 'hip hinge, bilateral stance, sagittal plane' describes the motion without naming the tool. A fast medium-weight hip hinge in that description is a kettlebell swing. A slow heavy hip hinge in that description is a one-rep-max deadlift. These are radically different drugs — different loads, different velocities, different neural demands, different adaptations — but they both satisfy 'hip hinge bilateral sagittal.' The tool comes last, after the dose is specified, because the dose determines the adaptation and the tool is merely the delivery vehicle.
Hip hinge bilateral stance sagittal plane that describes the motion it doesn't tell you what tool it doesn't say barbell trap bar dumbbell. A fast hip hinge that's medium weight is a kettlebell swing a heavy hip hinge that's slow is a one rep max deadlift you're going to get different outcomes from those things.
Also said
“There are 13 motor patterns I have three Cardinal planes of movement and I have three archetypical stances that you can do those movements from and then there are three loading zones heavy light in the middle three velocity zones fast slow in the middle and three duration zones long short and in the middle.”— The full taxonomy structure — the combinatorial alphabet from which any exercise in human vocabulary can be described.
What's new
Personal practice updates, fresh positions, predictions
7 items
The fitness industry is in the 'Gilded Age' — still craft-apprenticeship, not standardized science
~20 min
Davidson, a former professor who trained coaches for NFL combines and special operators, argues that fitness is the youngest industry and the only one still operating on a master-craftsman apprenticeship model. No taxonomy, no standardization, no evidence base for exercise selection — just whoever is charismatic enough to attract followers.
Why this matters: The observation reframes why so many smart, wealthy clients cannot distinguish a good trainer from a bad one: the domain lacks the standardized taxonomy that makes quality legible in any other industry.
Background
Davidson transitioned from academia (professor training S&C coaches) to Manhattan personal training and was shocked that the smartest, richest consumers on the planet had zero ability to evaluate Fitness provider competency — because no evaluation framework exists.
He analogizes fitness to medicine and nutrition: medicine has pharmacological categories, dosing protocols, titration logic, side-effect profiles. Nutrition has calories, macros, evidence hierarchies. Fitness has: 'I like this exercise for you.' His mission is to build the taxonomy layer that makes fitness as legible as pharmacology — not so he can prescribe the same drug to everyone, but so any provider can make a logical, defensible, evidence-based selection at point of care.
The thing that I want people to take away more than anything is removal of arbitrary decision making. To me anytime that I hear something that indicates an arbitrary decision I'm like whoa this is a big problem.
Also said
“Manhattan uh people are some of the smartest richest most Discerning people you'll find on the planet and they cannot distinguish between different levels of Fitness providers and they actually like so there is a zero understanding on the consumer side what a good product is.”— The consumer-side failure is the direct consequence of the provider-side's missing taxonomy — quality cannot be recognized without a reference standard.
7-Pillar algorithmic model: the McDonald's cash register for intelligent exercise prescription
~40 min
Davidson's system uses 7 filters to narrow from all possible exercises down to the single best tool for this person right now. Pillars 1-2 cover taxonomy (movement patterns x planes x stances x load/velocity/duration zones). Pillar 3 is movement standardization (chimp-vs-human quality check). Pillar 4 is difficulty matching. The analogy is a McDonald's cash register: the cashier hits one button and the full system fires — consistent output without requiring the cashier to understand the supply chain.
Why this matters: The McDonald's register framing captures exactly what's missing from fitness: a point-of-care decision tool that produces consistent, appropriate output from a provider of any skill level — the Gilded Age replaced by standardized system.
Background
Davidson spent 3.5 years writing the accompanying book and has been building the model for 20 years; he only began teaching it publicly in January (of what he identifies as the prior year to filming).
The letter/word/sentence/paragraph/book metaphor: a single exercise is a letter. A workout is a word. A weekly training block is a sentence. A mesocycle is a paragraph. The full program is a book. The model ensures you never start with an inappropriate letter — because a word built from bad letters will never tell the right story. The 13 motor patterns x 3 planes x 3 stances form the combinatorial alphabet. The loading/velocity/duration axes determine the dose. Together they describe any exercise in the human vocabulary without naming a specific tool — leaving the tool selection to what can actually be executed well by this person.
I have my Seven Pillars system and I use pillars I almost think of it in reality as more like filters or cheesecloth and at the after you filter all possible things through these seven layers you're left with a very specific end product a tool and that is an exercise that makes the most sense for the person that you're working with based upon their goals and their needs.
Also said
“It started with like a letter you know a letter would be a single exercise and I would arrange that letter relative to other letters and by doing that I can make a word you know and that word could be a workout and if I arrange those workouts in a logical manner it would be like arranging words together to make a sentence.”— The storytelling-ape metaphor for program design — humans are motivated by narrative, and training programs should tell a story that pulls the person forward.
Ground-contact as the master variable for exercise selection and progression
~1 h 10 min
Davidson defines 'ground' as anything that is not you that you can push against and that pushes back — seats, backrests, handles, the floor, the bar path. The more ground contact, the more stable and beginner-appropriate the exercise. The less ground, the more low-interaction-athlete it becomes (skateboarders, high divers). Progression = systematically removing ground until you reach the right slot for the person's sport or goals.
Why this matters: This single variable explains why machines are not inferior to free weights — they are higher-ground and therefore appropriate starting points — and why TRX instability work is not an advanced technique but a misapplication of low-ground tools to beginners who need high-ground learning environments.
The high-ground versus low-ground athlete spectrum: NFL interior linemen and power lifters are extreme high-ground athletes — their excellence depends on NOT tumbling and turning through space. High divers, skateboarders, and surfers are extreme low-ground athletes — their excellence depends on the ability to tumble and reorient in free space. Training an interior lineman on TRX movements would make him worse at his sport; training a skateboarder on nothing but leg press and machines would make her worse at hers. General population health/aesthetics goals (muscle mass, fat loss) align more closely with high-ground athletes — which means compound machine work and stable bilateral loading is not a compromise, it's the correct choice for this population.
I identify ground as anything that's not you that you can touch and push against and that's going to also push against you and as a for instance something that would be a tremendous amount of ground would be like a leg press you've got a seat that your butt's on you've got a back rest you got handles you're holding on to with your hands you've got a sled that you've got your feet on.
Also said
“I would say this is the other thing I want to see that you exercise and you do things properly and across the board everyone's going to learn how to do things properly by giving them more ground interaction in the beginning.”— The practical prescription: start high-ground regardless of goal, systematically remove ground as competence rises.
“That which distinguishes great low interaction with the ground athletes is their ability to turn and Tumble through space. That which distinguishes great High Ground interaction athletes is the ability to not turn and Tumble in space.”— Defines the two ends of the spectrum and explains why the same exercise is exactly right for one athlete and exactly wrong for another.
Jacksonian dissolution: stress causes movement to regress toward chimpanzee mechanics
~1 h 25 min
John Hughlings Jackson's 1850s neurobiology theory holds that stress inhibits the most evolutionarily modern brain structures first, causing reliance on older systems. Davidson maps this to movement: high-load or high-velocity exercise 'shoves' the center of mass forward, and the body responds by moving progressively more like a chimpanzee (lateral lurch, trunk-collapse, loss of upright stability). The training goal is controlled regression followed by full return to modern human baseline.
Why this matters: Provides a mechanistic explanation for why load placement matters: a barbell on your back pushes your center of mass forward and makes you move more chimp-like; a goblet squat pushes it backward and keeps you more upright. This is not aesthetics — it's the evolutionary stress-response in action.
Davidson uses this framework to evaluate movement quality quickly: 'Does this person walk like a chimp?' A chimp placed on two feet lurches side-to-side, unable to contain head and trunk between the feet during forward locomotion — exactly the compensatory pattern seen in untrained humans under load. The upright, stable, single-axis human gait is the most modern evolutionary expression; any deviation under load is a Jacksonian dissolution signal. The goal of Pillar 3 (movement standardization) is to set the minimum modern-human movement quality threshold and then identify exercises where that threshold can be maintained for this person at this point in their development.
Whenever I'm evaluating someone very quickly on how well can you move overall how many cool things are you going to be able to do I always look at it like do you walk like a chimp. If I put the Chimp on two feet and when you walk watch a chimp walk on two feet it basically lurches back and forth side to side it's skeleton just it's like a drunk person or a penguin.
Also said
“When an organism a human is presented with stress it will cause the most modern parts of the brain to become inhibited and there will be a Reliance on older parts of the brain to deal with this higher stress environment.”— The Jacksonian dissolution mechanism — stress degrades the movement system in a predictable evolutionary direction, not randomly.
The 'smart drug' evolution of exercise: specificity, fewer side effects, better targeting
~55 min
Davidson draws a direct analogy between the pharmacology evolution from 'dumb drugs' (broad receptor interaction, many side effects) to 'smart drugs' (specific target cells, minimal side effects) and the evolution he wants for exercise prescription. A dumb exercise activates many things at once with unpredictable limiting factors; a smart exercise makes the intended muscle group the limiter and produces the intended adaptation reliably.
Why this matters: The back squat as the canonical 'dumb exercise' example: the stated goal is glutes and quads, but the limiting factor for most untrained people is their back, technical ability, or something else — meaning glutes and quads are NOT what adapts. The hack squat is the 'smart' version for that population: it makes quads the limiter reliably.
Davidson is explicit that the back squat is not bad — but it is less targeted for muscle mass goals in untrained individuals than a hack squat. The emotional connection people have with barbell exercises (investment of time, identity formation around mastery) is a real psychological phenomenon — movement originates from a cortical network that includes emotional, sensory, and cognitive layers. The clinical problem is when that emotional connection causes clients and trainers to defend a less-efficient tool on grounds of tradition rather than evidence. The prescription logic: identify the outcome then select the drug (exercise category) then pick the dose (load/velocity/duration zone) then choose the tool that makes the intended tissue the limiting factor for this person at this competency level.
I would say that a back squat is going to train you know technically it's going to be the axial skeleton and the appendicular skeleton in terms of the muscles. I've seen enough people that are average to below average exercise performers Squat and almost never is it their legs or their butt that's the limiter it's their their back or their technical ability.
Also said
“Something along even a hack squat a machine where it's you know you get in it it's on its path you push up and you shoot the machine up you come down and it's like I guarantee you that if you do that particular piece of equipment it's going to be your quads that are going to be the thing that's your limiter.”— The smart-drug version: specific targeting, predictable adaptation, appropriate for the population.
Center-of-mass forward shift as the unified mechanism behind most technical breakdowns under load
~1 h 30 min
When the center of mass shifts forward (e.g., barbell on the back, excessive forward lean), the body compensates through chimpanzee-like mechanics regardless of the exercise. Load placement that pushes the center of mass backward (goblet squat, hack squat with backrest) produces more vertical, stable movement because it counters this shift.
Why this matters: The single underlying mechanism that explains why squat vs. hinge differentiation matters, why load placement matters, and why the same movement pattern can produce radically different technique and adaptation depending on tool choice.
Davidson: when I think about a squat I want it to be vertical — you are in the elevator not the escalator. The hinge you are in the escalator not the elevator. But most people are in both at the same time — neither one nor the other. The confusion between squat and hinge mechanics at the point of execution is almost always a center-of-mass management failure caused by the wrong load placement for the person's current competency.
All load placement that I use to set you up for a squat if I put the bar on your back it's going to push your Center of mass forward if I put the load in front of you it's going to shift your Center of mass backwards you're going to be way more comfortable if I goblet squat you as compared to overhead squat you.
General population goals align with high-ground athlete training — not low-ground novelty
~1 h 0 min
Most gym-goers come to look better and be healthier. Davidson argues these goals map directly onto high-ground athlete training methods — compound machines, stable bilateral loading, progressive overload in the 30-85% 1RM range — not the Instagram-worthy low-ground instability exercises that dominate commercial gym floors.
Why this matters: Reframes the machines-vs-free-weights debate entirely: the question is not 'which is better' but 'which ground level is appropriate for this person's goals and competency.' For most general population clients, high-ground machines are not a compromise — they are the correct drug.
Davidson points out that changing muscle mass is one of the easiest things in fitness — there is a very wide window of methods that work (30-85% 1RM, multiple equipment options, multiple tempos). Top-end speed is among the hardest, with a very narrow genetic window and very few effective methods. The general population is in the easy-window territory: almost any competently applied progressive overload works. The value of his system is not finding the one correct exercise but eliminating the clearly wrong ones and arriving at a high-probability correct one — with the least cost of doing business.
When it comes to the low hanging fruit of general population goals of cardiorespiratory adaptations and skeletal muscle mass there's a million ways that I can get there actually what I'm trying to get at is what's the most appropriate way for you with the least cost of doing business that is the differentiating factor.
Recommendations
Products, supplements, and tools mentioned in the episode
2 items
Hack Squat Machine (as canonical beginner quad training tool)
Tool
Davidson recommends the hack squat as the prototypical 'smart drug' for quad-dominant lower body work in general population clients — not because it is the only option, but because it maximizes ground contact, places the load in a position that keeps the center of mass stable, and reliably makes the quadriceps (not the lower back or technical skill) the limiting factor.
The hack squat exemplifies Davidson's entire system in one tool: high ground (seat, back pad, shoulder pads, guided path), appropriate dose range (30-85% machine load), reliable limiting factor (quads), low side-effect profile (back and technique are not the limiters). Davidson contrasts this with the back squat, which requires high technical proficiency to make the intended muscles the actual limiting factor — making it a 'dumb drug' relative to the hack squat for this population's goals.
I guarantee you that if you do that particular piece of equipment it's going to be your quads that are going to be the thing that's your limiter that's going to be the thing that gets trained and if that's your goal then that's probably more in line with your goal.
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert Pirsig
Book
Davidson cites this as a philosophical foundation for his approach to movement quality — specifically the Socratic problem of defining 'quality' and why any attempt to reduce quality to a checklist is ultimately self-defeating. He uses it to acknowledge the limits of Pillar 3 (movement standardization).
Davidson references the book's central thesis: Socrates, by introducing reductionist thinking and dismissing qualitative judgment, set Western thought on a path where 'quality' can only be recognized but never fully defined. Any definition of 'good movement' (like Gray Cook's FMS) will eventually be falsified by science as measuring only itself. Davidson's response is to base his quality criterion on something prior to quality judgments — evolutionary biology — and to acknowledge openly that this particular pillar is belief-grounded rather than empirically locked.
vs alternatives
Gray Cook's Functional Movement Screen attempted a similar 'define good movement' project through a scored checklist. Exercise science research subsequently showed the FMS 'only measures itself' — it does not predict injury risk. Davidson's approach sidesteps that falsification risk by grounding quality in evolutionary biology rather than a scoring system.
One of my favorite books is uh Zen In The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and the premise of that book is that the worst thing that ever happened in Western Society is Socrates and it's because Socrates uh throughout the notion of quality and only went into reductionist thinking.
Vibratory wearable worn on wrist or ankle that delivers programmed pulses for stress management, energy, or sleep. Lyon uses it for caffeine reduction and sleep quality.
DisclosureEpisode sponsor — Lyon describes personal use. Code 'Dr Lyon' for $40 off at apolloneuro.com.
The Apollo wearable really kind of gives you this boost of energy without any stimulants it was developed by neuroscientists and Physicians delivers a what I consider a soothing vibration.
Fermented grass-fed grass-finished beef sticks with natural probiotic from fermentation; Lyon's recommended on-the-go protein source.
DisclosureEpisode sponsor — Lyon promotes. Code 'Dr Lyon' at paleovalley.com for 15% off.
These sticks are fermented and it creates a natural occurring probiotic potentially even Prebiotic and we know that that's critical for gut health they taste amazing they are great for on the go.
Lines worth pulling out — contrarian, specific, or perfectly phrased
6 items
The thing that I want people to take away more than anything is removal of arbitrary decision making. To me anytime that I hear something that indicates an arbitrary decision I'm like whoa this is a big problem.
The single organizing principle of Davidson's entire system — every protocol, every tool choice, every progression should be defensible, not 'I just like this one.'
When it comes to the low hanging fruit of general population goals of cardiorespiratory adaptations and skeletal muscle mass there's a million ways that I can get there actually what I'm trying to get at is what's the most appropriate way for you with the least cost of doing business that is the differentiating factor.
The practical upshot: the free-weights vs. machines debate is irrelevant. The only question is which approach delivers the goal with the least side-effect burden for this specific person.
I always look at it like do you walk like a chimp. If I put the Chimp on two feet and when you walk watch a chimp walk on two feet it basically lurches back and forth side to side it's skeleton just it's like a drunk person or a penguin.
The rapid global movement quality screen — observable, non-technical, immediately actionable, and grounded in evolutionary biology.
Hip hinge bilateral stance sagittal plane that describes the motion it doesn't tell you what tool it doesn't say barbell trap bar dumbbell. A fast hip hinge that's medium weight is a kettlebell swing a heavy hip hinge that's slow is a one rep max deadlift you're going to get different outcomes from those things.
Demonstrates exactly how to think about exercise selection systematically — category then dose before tool — in a concrete, memorable example.
When I think about a squat I want it to be vertical when I think about a hinge I want it to be horizontal a squat you're in the elevator not the escalator the hinge you're in the escalator not the elevator but most people are in both at the same time kind of thing.
The elevator/escalator dichotomy — the clearest possible articulation of the squat-vs-hinge distinction and the single diagnostic question for mixed-pattern breakdowns.
I don't know if I believe in God but if there is God in my mind the closest proximity to it is progress. Directionality towards something better.
Davidson's personal driving philosophy — and the framing that explains why the fitness industry's Gilded Age stagnation is, to him, not just inefficiency but a kind of moral failure.
Sign in to share feedback
Tell us if this brief hit the mark or missed it — feedback feeds back into the next iteration of the prompt.
Reading is free for everyone. A free account adds the personal layer: save protocols, follow experts, and see how the other experts weigh in on this same topic.
Educational summary of the cited expert source — not medical advice. Open the source recording linked above and consult a qualified physician before acting on any protocol.
