Failure and the Human Condition

Ethel Kennedy, widow of Robert F. Kennedy, endured a life marked by bitter tragedy. She lost both of her parents in a plane crash, and 11 years later, another crash claimed her brother’s life. Soon after, his wife tragically choked to death. Ethel then faced the assassinations of her husband and brother-in-law President John F. Kennedy.

Her heartbreak continued as two of her sons, David and Michael, died young—one from a drug overdose, the other in a skiing accident. The Kennedy family’s turmoil extended further, with her children battling divorces, drug arrests and public scandals. Through it all, Ethel exemplified the Kennedy family credo: “Kennedys don’t cry.”

This stoic philosophy reflects strength and resilience but also hints at the emotional costs of suppressing grief. While Ethel raised her 11 children and continued her public service amid unimaginable loss, the family’s reluctance to express vulnerability may have contributed to unresolved emotional trauma, particularly in later generations.

Ethel Kennedy’s life highlights that wealth and privilege offer no immunity from grief. Her ability to persevere publicly despite personal tragedies demonstrates remarkable fortitude, yet the family’s credo likely placed a heavy emotional burden on her and her children, forcing them to carry private pain without an outlet for shared emotional release.

---

Failure and disappointment are inevitable in life, but many students enter college having rarely faced significant setbacks. This leaves them unprepared for challenges—academic, romantic or financial—that invariably arise.

Students often bring with them not only high personal expectations but also pressure from family and peers. This pressure can create a fear of failure that causes them to avoid situations where they might fall short. They may develop fragile egos, lacking the emotional tools to handle failure. Used to high grades, they may adopt a perfectionist mindset, equating their self-worth with their achievements. As a result, constructive criticism can feel like a personal attack, exacerbating anxiety and resistance to feedback.

Beyond academics, students will likely face romantic and social disappointments, which can seem overwhelming for those unaccustomed to such challenges. Financial stress also emerges, with students managing budgets, loans or job prospects for the first time.

Navigating frustration and disappointment is crucial for personal growth and long-term resilience. Educators must teach students that failure is not an endpoint but a stepping stone. The humanities offer unique support, complementing therapy, self-help and mentorship by providing broader, existential perspectives on life’s challenges. While therapy focuses on individual well-being and coping mechanisms, the humanities help students understand their struggles within a larger cultural, historical and philosophical framework.

While therapy tends to focus on managing and overcoming failure, the humanities explore failure as a cultural and philosophical phenomenon. Understanding how different societies and thinkers have interpreted failure offers students alternative ways of viewing their setbacks.

---

In American culture, where success is revered, failure often feels like a deep personal indictment and a blow to one’s self-worth. This cultural fixation on achievement leaves little room for mistakes, making failure seem almost taboo. The humanities, however, offer essential tools to navigate these pressures, especially in a society that equates worth with success.

Professors in the humanities play a key role in helping students reframe their relationship with failure. Unlike fields that focus solely on practical problem-solving, the humanities provide emotional and philosophical resources for understanding life’s challenges.

In a culture where failure is treated as an existential threat, the humanities remind students that it’s a fundamental part of being human. Professors can foster an environment that encourages intellectual risks, helping students see that mistakes are not personal betrayals but opportunities for growth. By normalizing struggle and showing that success and failure are not rigid endpoints, humanities educators help students develop resilience, self-compassion and a broader perspective on life.

In a culture that glorifies winning, failure is not a personal flaw, but a chance to reflect, learn and grow. This humanistic perspective is crucial for helping students build the resilience they need to thrive, both in college and beyond.

---

Failure can be internalized—where one takes personal responsibility—or externalized, where the blame is placed on external factors.

When people internalize failure, they attribute it to their own shortcomings, such as lack of effort, skill or ability. This self-blame can foster feelings of guilt, shame and inadequacy. Internalization places the locus of control within the individual, implying that they believe they have control over outcomes, even if those outcomes are negative.

In contrast, externalizing failure shifts responsibility onto external forces, such as bad luck, other people’s actions or structural barriers. By attributing failure to external factors, individuals avoid self-blame but may also experience a sense of helplessness, believing that the causes are beyond their control.

Both approaches have psychological and social consequences. Internalizing failure can promote personal accountability and motivate self-improvement, but may also damage self-esteem if individuals view their failures as inherent flaws. Externalizing failure can protect self-worth by deflecting blame but may lead to a lack of personal growth or a victim mentality if overused.

According to attribution theory, developed by Fritz Heider, Harold Kelley and Bernard Weiner, people explain events through three dimensions. First, locus of control: Is the cause internal (within oneself) or external (outside factors)? Second, stability: Is the cause stable (likely to persist) or unstable (temporary)? Third, controllability: Can the individual control the cause or is it outside their influence?

Cultural factors also play a role in how people interpret failure. In individualistic cultures, failure is often internalized, with an emphasis on personal responsibility. In collectivist cultures, externalization may be more common, with failures attributed to broader social or environmental factors, helping protect individual self-esteem.

A balanced approach, recognizing both personal responsibility and external influences, promotes resilience and personal growth, allowing individuals to learn from failure without being overwhelmed by self-blame.

---

Various religious and philosophical traditions offer diverse approaches to understanding and dealing with failure, yet most emphasize growth, reflection and transformation rather than defeat.

• Stoicism views failure as inevitable and beyond our control. Stoics focus on how individuals respond to failure, seeing it as a test of character and an opportunity to practice virtues like patience, wisdom and resilience. Inner peace and moral integrity are prioritized over external success.
• Judaism addresses failure through teshuva (repentance), seeing it as an opportunity for introspection and moral renewal. The Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) encourages reflection on past failures and seeking forgiveness, framing failure as a step toward spiritual growth, not an end.
• Christianity also views failure through the lens of human fallibility and divine grace. Biblical narratives underscore human imperfection but emphasize redemption through faith and repentance. Failure is seen as a catalyst for spiritual growth and alignment with God’s will.
• Islam teaches that failure is part of Allah’s divine plan, urging believers to respond with sabr (patience). The Quran reminds believers that Allah never burdens them beyond their capacity and failure is seen as a test of faith, with the correct response being perseverance and trust in God’s wisdom.
• Buddhism interprets failure as inherent to the impermanence (anicca) and suffering (dukkha) of life. Through mindfulness and meditation, Buddhists cultivate detachment from outcomes, using failure to deepen their understanding of life’s transience.
• In Hinduism, failure is understood through karma (cause and effect) and dharma (righteous duty). The Bhagavad Gita emphasizes acting without attachment to success or failure, accepting setbacks as part of the cosmic order.
• Taoism attributes failure to resisting the natural flow of the Tao. The principle of wu wei (nonaction) encourages individuals to align with the natural world, accepting failure without resistance to foster peace and minimize suffering.

Across these traditions, failure is a moment for growth and inner transformation, not permanent defeat.

---

Coping with failure has been a central theme in both early theological and philosophical traditions and modern psychological and self-help advice, but the approaches differ significantly.

In traditional theology and philosophy, failure was often seen in a broader cosmic or divine context. Christian theology interpreted failure as part of human fallibility and sin, with redemption sought through God’s grace. Failure was understood as part of God’s divine plan, requiring faith and repentance for recovery. Stoic philosophy framed failure as something beyond individual control, urging acceptance of fate and focus on cultivating inner virtues like resilience and wisdom.

In contrast, modern psychology and self-help literature emphasize individual agency and the capacity to regulate emotions and reshape responses to failure. Techniques like cognitive-behavioral therapy, mindfulness and emotional regulation are designed to help individuals manage their internal reactions and view failure as a learning opportunity. Carol Dweck’s growth mindset concept encourages individuals to see failures as steps toward growth and self-improvement.

While earlier traditions like Christianity and Stoicism interpreted failure as a moral or spiritual issue, requiring patience and alignment with divine will or fate, modern advice focuses more on personal empowerment and control. Positive psychology promotes building resilience through tools like gratitude and optimism, helping people recover from failure by fostering a mindset that frames setbacks as temporary and surmountable.

The key difference is that traditional frameworks often placed failure within a larger, external order—be it divine will or cosmic fate—while modern approaches prioritize individual control, emotional regulation and personal growth.

---

Academic psychology has extensively studied how individuals cope with failure, emphasizing resilience, emotional regulation and adaptive coping mechanisms.

George Bonanno’s research on resilience highlights that people’s ability to recover from setbacks varies, but resilience is not a fixed trait. It can be cultivated through strategies like maintaining a positive outlook, seeking social support and using humor. Bonanno’s work shows that resilience involves adaptive coping processes, not just inherent traits.

James Gross has studied emotional regulation, showing that strategies like cognitive reappraisal (rethinking the meaning of failure) and acceptance are more effective in managing the emotional impact of failure than avoidance or suppression. These approaches help individuals process disappointment and move forward.

Attribution theory suggests that how individuals explain their failures influences their recovery. Those who attribute failures to controllable factors (e.g., effort) are more likely to try again, whereas those who see failure as the result of uncontrollable factors (e.g., luck) may feel helpless and less motivated to improve.

Positive psychology, championed by Martin Seligman, emphasizes building resilience through positive emotions, engagement and a sense of purpose. It frames failure as an opportunity for growth, maintaining that qualities like gratitude, optimism and perseverance are essential for overcoming setbacks.

Across both academic psychology and self-help literature, a recurring theme is the reframing of failure as a springboard toward growth. Concepts like Carol Dweck’s growth mindset and post-traumatic growth in positive psychology illustrate that failure is an integral part of learning and development. Both approaches emphasize that failure should lead to constructive action, such as refining strategies, learning from mistakes and developing resilience for future challenges.

---

Americans’ relationship with failure has evolved significantly, reflecting broader cultural, economic and social shifts.

In the colonial era, failure was often viewed through a religious lens. Puritan settlers saw personal failures as signs of divine disfavor. This reinforced a culture of moral scrutiny, with failure prompting self-examination and spiritual renewal.

During the 19th century, failure became a test of perseverance. The “frontier spirit” and the rise of “rags-to-riches” tales glorified those who overcame setbacks. Temporary failure was romanticized as part of the American success story, with resilience seen as key to self-made success.

By the Gilded Age, economic failure became more individualized. Self-help literature promoted the idea that personal flaws, rather than structural factors, led to failure. While entrepreneurs who rebounded from financial ruin became celebrated, those who did not were often stigmatized.

The Great Depression redefined failure on a national scale. The economic collapse challenged the belief that hard work alone ensured success. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal acknowledged the structural causes of failure, shifting the focus from individual shortcomings to collective solutions.

In the post–World War II era, marked by economic prosperity and suburban conformity, failure became stigmatized in new ways. Social expectations left little room for those who didn’t meet benchmarks of financial and familial success, leading to the rise of psychotherapy and self-help as tools to manage feelings of inadequacy.

By the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the entrepreneurial culture of Silicon Valley reframed failure as a learning experience. While failure became a badge of honor in tech and creative fields, the gig economy’s precariousness meant that for many, failure still led to lasting hardship.

In today’s social media–driven world, failure is hypervisible. While some public figures share failures as part of a personal growth narrative, economic inequality means that for many, failure remains fraught with severe consequences, both social and economic.

Throughout these shifts, failure has oscillated between being seen as a moral shortcoming and a launching pad toward growth and reinvention.

---

The American relationship with failure is marked by a tension between moral condemnation and belief in redemption. On the one hand, failure is often seen as a personal shortcoming—a reflection of poor judgment or discipline. On the other hand, failure is widely regarded as a necessary part of growth and innovation. This duality is especially evident in the U.S. bankruptcy system, which allows individuals and businesses to recover from financial collapse, offering both a pragmatic solution and reflecting the cultural belief in second chances.

While bankruptcy is sometimes seen as a personal failing, it also offers a “fresh start,” allowing people to discharge debts and rebuild their lives. This reflects the belief that failure should not be a life sentence and that individuals deserve the opportunity to recover and try again. However, the ability to bounce back from failure is not equally distributed—wealthier individuals often have more resources to recover, while those with fewer means may face long-term consequences.

The U.S. economy’s dynamism is partly due to this balance, encouraging risk-taking while also recognizing that mistakes are inevitable. Yet, structural inequalities shape who truly benefits from the opportunity to “fail forward.”

---

Many American novels and films explore the theme of failure. These works reflect the contradictions of American culture, where failure is both stigmatized and seen as a universal, potentially redemptive experience.

• In The Great Gatsby (1925), F. Scott Fitzgerald depicts Jay Gatsby’s tragic pursuit of wealth, status and love, exposing the moral emptiness behind his ambitions, critiquing the idea that material success guarantees fulfillment.
• Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman (1949) portrays Willy Loman’s inability to achieve financial success, which he equates with self-worth, as a reflection of the crushing weight of societal expectations and the systemic pressures of capitalism, where the pursuit of the American dream can destroy those who fall short.
• Lorraine Hansberry’s A Raisin in the Sun (1959) addresses failure and resilience through a Black family’s struggles in 1950s America. Their individual disappointments—Walter’s failed investment, Beneatha’s blocked path to becoming a doctor and Mama’s deferred dream of homeownership—are compounded by racial discrimination. Despite these setbacks, Walter’s rejection of a bribe marks his reclaiming of dignity, redefining success as self-respect, not wealth.

Few American writers dissect the pursuit of success and inevitable failure as critically as Theodore Dreiser. In Sister Carrie and An American Tragedy, success is portrayed as fragile, driven not by merit but by chance, leaving characters unfulfilled. Dreiser suggests that systemic pressures, rather than personal failings, drive people toward moral compromise, exposing the dehumanizing pursuit of wealth in a capitalist society.

---

Here are some of the scholars, philosophers, psychologists and historians who have explored the concept of failure.

• Friedrich Nietzsche viewed failure as crucial for personal growth. He argued that suffering and setbacks foster resilience and authenticity. Nietzsche’s idea of amor fati—the love of fate—encourages embracing failure as part of self-actualization.
• Sigmund Freud saw failure as a manifestation of unconscious conflicts. He believed that repeated failures might arise from unresolved desires or anxieties, with self-sabotage emerging from repressed emotions. His concept of “repetition compulsion” explains how individuals might unconsciously recreate failure to confront unresolved past conflicts.
• John Dewey emphasized failure as integral to learning. He argued that mistakes offer valuable feedback, encouraging reflection and adaptation. For Dewey, failure was not a dead end but a chance for intellectual growth.
• Simone de Beauvoir argued that facing failure is necessary for understanding freedom and responsibility.
• Albert Camus advocated for resilience and defiance in the face of failure, seeing it as an opportunity for meaning-making.
• Samuel Beckett, with his line “Fail again. Fail better,” embraced failure as an intrinsic part of life. Beckett’s work often depicts the futility of striving, yet he encourages persistence, suggesting that failure itself can be a productive force.
• Ernest Becker connected the fear of failure with the fear of death, arguing that the pursuit of success is often an attempt to overcome mortality, with failure reminding us of our limitations and mortality.
• Brené Brown focuses on vulnerability, shame and resilience, suggesting that embracing vulnerability and failure allows for more authentic living and growth, reframing failure as a part of creativity and leadership.
• Carol Dweck distinguishes between a fixed and a growth mindset. Those with a growth mindset view failure as an opportunity for learning, while those with a fixed mindset see it as a reflection of their inherent abilities.
• Alain de Botton critiques modern society’s fear of failure, suggesting that anxieties often stem from the fear of losing social status. He argues that redefining failure can free individuals from external pressures to succeed.

Historians have also explored failure from different angles.

• Edward Gibbon chronicled the decline of the Roman Empire, showing how internal decay, complacency and leadership failures led to its collapse.
• Arnold J. Toynbee argued that civilizations fail due to internal rigidity and an inability to adapt to changing challenges.
• Barbara Tuchman analyzed how political folly, stubbornness and poor judgment led to historical disasters, arguing that many failures result from a refusal to learn from past mistakes.
• William H. McNeill illustrated how biological and environmental forces, beyond human control, contributed to the failures of societies, such as the Black Death’s role in reshaping Europe.
• John Lewis Gaddis studied the Cold War, showing how ideological rigidity and military overconfidence led to failures like the Vietnam War.
• Paul Kennedy coined the term “imperial overstretch,” showing how empires overextended their military and economic resources, leading to their decline.
• Jared Diamond identified factors like environmental damage and resource mismanagement as key contributors to societal collapse, emphasizing the importance of adaptation.
• Scott Sandage, in Born Losers, explored how failure became stigmatized in 19th- and 20th-century America, equating personal value with economic success. He examined how failure turned into a marker of social disgrace, shaping individuals’ self-identity and societal roles.

Together, these thinkers reveal that failure is not simply an event, but a complex, multidimensional experience that is deeply embedded in human existence, influencing personal development, societal structures and historical trajectories.

---

To help students navigate academic, personal and financial disappointments, educators must integrate strategies that build resilience and foster a healthier relationship with failure.

1. Normalize failure: Discuss failure and offer examples of how successful individuals have faced setbacks. Help students understand that failure is not something to be feared but an opportunity for growth.
2. Encourage self-reflection: After a setback, encourage students to reflect on what went wrong, what they learned and how they can approach challenges differently in the future.
3. Focus on effort, not outcome: Praise students for their effort, growth and persistence, rather than their results, helping students see failure as part of the journey rather than a reflection of their worth.
4. The humanities as a coping tool: The humanities offer invaluable resources for dealing with failure.

A business degree may prepare students for financial success, but it’s the humanities that equip them to handle life’s inevitable setbacks—whether professional, personal or emotional. Life doesn’t follow a neat plan. Failure comes in many forms—unrealized dreams, the loss of loved ones or the collapse of ventures.

No spreadsheet or business strategy can fully prepare individuals for the emotional toll of these experiences. This is where the humanities step in. Through literature, philosophy, history and the arts, students learn not only how to endure failure but how to find meaning in it.

Here are some of the unique contributions that the humanities can offer:

1. The humanities place personal failure within a wider historical and cultural context, showing how it has shaped humanity’s evolution. By seeing failure as part of a larger narrative, students learn that their setbacks are not isolated or unique.
2. The humanities can help students confront broader questions of meaning. Philosophers like Kierkegaard and Nietzsche grapple with despair and uncertainty, offering ways to confront life’s inherent unpredictability. This will help students see failure as part of the human condition rather than something to be “fixed."
3. Literature can reveal that failure is a shared human experience. Literature can foster empathy and show that failure is a universal part of the human journey.
4. Philosophy challenges students to think critically about societal definitions of success and failure, offering alternative ways of understanding these concepts.
5. In the arts, individuals often transform failure into creative expression. This shows students that failure can be generative and meaningful, not merely something to overcome.
6. The humanities show that failure and disappointment are human, not pathological, experiences. Unlike therapy, which may pathologize, medicalize or psychologize failure, the humanities treat it as a natural part of life. This broader approach can be liberating, helping students accept failure without seeing it as something that needs to be “cured.”

The humanities provide a way to contextualize failure within the broader human experience, explore its moral and ethical dimensions and transform it into something meaningful or creative. The humanities invite reflection, empathy and a deeper understanding of what it means to fail—and, ultimately, to live as a flawed, striving human being.