Mental Toughness & Grit Unfounded Science
For both mental toughness (MT) and grit, there are a number of reasons why these concepts are considered to reflect modest and unfounded science.
-Neither concept considers our innate wiring to adapt and survive (which is, in effect, our true innate toughness), thus they ignore neurophysiology which is a well-defined science in this area.
-We are wired to survive, as per evolutionary dynamics, which relies on a process of stimulation and rest
-Everyone can be enhanced to be more ready, resilient, and adaptive through proper dosing and timing of both training and rest (this scientific principle is not adequately addressed by MT or grit)
-Both concepts are not well-defined phenomenon, especially when they have not included neurophysiology or objective science:
-Their definitions are, therefore, subjective because they are derived from subjective information
-Observation or information is derived from subjects after the fact of the experience (which is a modest form of data/research at best)
-Subjective data of this type can only be considered raw data and cannot be trusted – that is, while we can use the data, it should not be conflated beyond what it actually is/says, as has been done with both terms
-Because MT/grit have the illusion of validity and that is fueled by belief bias (meaning we want to desperately believe that the multifactorial process of performance is very simple), they become true without proper scientific proof
-The inaccuracies of the defined concepts thus paradoxically lead to meaning both nothing and everything, which is an indicator of a poor scientific concept
-Reducing such complex concepts to simple terms additionally stand in the way of health and long-term athletic/personal development have little scientific validity, and we know that health is the foundation of performance rather than (often misapplied and sensationalized) references to MT or grit
Please find the following studies that support the summary: