The Problem with “Never Give Up”

There is a topic I teach to university students about grit and persistence. We discuss the familiar idea that when someone commits themselves to a goal, their ability to keep going despite obstacles, setbacks, and failure often determines whether they eventually achieve it. Failure, in that framework, is not really failure. It becomes feedback, evidence that something in the process needs to be reconsidered, improved, or tried again.

With every cohort, I ask my students the same question: what if someone does everything they can and still gets nowhere close to the goal? How do we know when to keep chasing it, and when to let it go?

I have never had an answer.

They usually just stare back at me. As blankly as my mind goes whenever I ask myself the same question.

And just to be honest, whenever I ask the question, I am not really trying to challenge the students in the way I usually do. I am hoping one of them might somehow answer a question that has been sitting in my own mind for years.

The thing is, we are constantly told to keep going. Keep trying. Stay consistent. Trust the process. Do not give up too early. Then we inherit those ideas and teach them to another generation, and they will probably teach them to another one after that.

And there is truth in them. Almost anything worthwhile requires enough repetition to survive the period when very little seems to be happening. There are goals we abandon too early simply because progress is slower than we expected.

But there must also be a point when we admit that endlessly feeding something that never responds is not automatically grit. Sometimes it is simply one-sided.

It is like being in a relationship where you are always the one initiating, always making the effort, always maintaining the connection, always making yourself available, and receiving almost nothing in return.

At some point, something has to answer.

Otherwise, we are pouring ourselves into a void and calling it commitment.

And by “answer,” I do not mean immediate success. I do not mean that every effort should be rewarded, or that the world owes us a result simply because we worked hard.

I mean some form of reciprocity.

Maybe the attempt teaches us something we did not know before. Maybe an idea becomes clearer. Maybe someone responds differently. Maybe we discover what is not working. Maybe a new direction appears. Maybe the next step becomes visible because something actually happened, rather than because we once again forced ourselves to invent another step.

There has to be some exchange between effort and reality.

Because there comes a point when it is only natural to become tired of being the sole source of energy behind a pursuit. Tired of constantly generating the motivation for another attempt, another strategy, another beginning. Tired of being the only thing keeping the whole pursuit alive.

Sometimes we do not need a reward. We simply need evidence that our effort is interacting with something.

Enough evidence to show that the relationship between us and the thing we are investing in is still alive.

Maybe that is the answer I have been looking for every time I ask my students that question.

Persistence should not mean protecting a goal from every piece of evidence that contradicts it. Sometimes persistence means trying again. Sometimes it means trying differently. Sometimes it means changing the method while keeping the goal. And sometimes it means accepting that we have been supplying all the energy for far too long.

Perhaps the absence of feedback is feedback too.

Yes, we should be careful not to give up too early. But we should also learn not to stay too long simply because leaving would force us to confront everything we have already invested.

Maybe grit is not only knowing how to continue.

Maybe part of it is knowing what must be coming back from the pursuit in order for continuing to still make sense.

Something has to answer.