Further study of central nervous action, however, finds central inhibition too extensive and ubiquitous to make it likely that it is confined solely to the taxis of antagonistic muscles.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
That a strong stimulus to such an afferent nerve, exciting most or all of its fibres, should in regard to a given muscle develop inhibition and excitation concurrently is not surprising.
Where would we be without inhibitions? They're quite useful things when you look at some of the things humans do if they lose them.
Now, there are a very large number of bodily movements, having their source in our nervous system, that do not possess the character of conscious actions.
Existence of an excited state is not a prerequisite for the production of inhibition; inhibition can exist apart from excitation no less than, when called forth against an excitation already in progress, it can suppress or moderate it.
Inhibition is something I notice in hamstrung actors all the time. They can be wonderful up to a point and then become very self-conscious.
If you do not use a muscle or any part of the body, it tends to become atrophic. So is the case with the brain. The more you use it, the better it becomes.
Anticipation of movement, through muscular innervation and memory, by its retention of nerve impulse images, extend the present to the limit of a second or so.
Physiology seeks to derive the processes in our own nervous system from general physical forces, without considering whether these processes are or are not accompanied by processes of consciousness.
The mental act of sensation which issues in reflex movement is so simple as to defy analysis.
All our behaviours are a result of neurophysiological activity in the brain.
No opposing quotes found.