===== 2025-05-13 =====

 ===== Happiness: Shared vs Private =====

I've been wanting to write this one for a while now. I saw a 
comment the other day on the subject of Minecraft, and 
singleplayer versus multiplayer experiences. The comment quoted 
Christopher McCandless, and read: "Happiness is only true when 
shared." The comment got a lot of positive reception, and upon 
looking it up I see an endless stream of praise for how true and 
profound it is, and see many articles examining the phrase and 
sentiment to show just how much the authors want to spread this 
powerful message. 

While I think I get where they're coming from, I disagree pretty 
emphatically with the statement. Sure, some happiness can come 
from experiences that are shared with others, or happiness can 
potentially be added to when an experience is shared. On the other 
hand, it seems pretty self-destructive to limit oneself to only 
accepting that one's happiness can be "true" if someone else is 
involved, doesn't it? Why limit yourself? Why subscribe to the 
limitation that you can't experience happiness without someone 
else to share it with? 

There are many happy memories I have involving my wife, my kids, 
my pets, my extended family, my friends, internet strangers, all 
that kind of thing - absolutely. I get it. But I also have quite a 
lot of happy memories from experiences that I consider mine alone. 
They feel like part of their value comes from the fact that they 
were private and intimate moments that resonated with me 
specifically. Is this selfish? Am I greedily keeping these happy 
experiences and memories to myself, and delighting in the fact 
that I have them while others do not? I don't think so. They're 
just powerful moments that I feel were powerful specifically 
because I am who am I as a unique individual. I've always kind of 
assumed everyone (hopefully) has their own collection of more 
personal happy moments, and things that make them happy without 
requiring the presence or acknowledgment of others. 

To the original topic in which I saw the comment: Minecraft 
worlds. My kids and I have a shared world we've had for many years 
that I love dearly. There's also a community server we're a part 
of that we're all very fond of and have made great memories on. I 
love these worlds because of the shared experiences and memories 
that have occurred on them. At the same time, I also have a 
private singleplayer world that I've never let anyone else into, 
where I've also had profoundly happy experiences. I've considered 
opening it up a time or two just on the local LAN to have my kids 
come visit and check things out, but somehow that just feels like 
it would be spoiling what that specific world is for. This one is 
meant for me alone. 

I really think there's a lot of value that can be found in 
private, solitary moments, and that these don't need to be shared 
with anyone else to make them "truly happy" or validated as "real" 
happy experiences. 

I don't know, man. It just feels really bizarre and self-limiting 
(and patronizing, to be frank) to put some kind of hard rule or 
requirement on "true" happiness. I'm probably over-analyzing it 
and mistaking the meaning - it probably just meant that sure, 
yeah, some moments can be made even better when shared with 
others, especially loved ones. But as a general blanket statement 
it just bugged me. 

P.S. I can't do so much pondering about "happiness" without 
thinking of this The Oatmeal comic on the subject, which I've 
always loved: https://theoatmeal.com/comics/unhappy 

Journal Index
gopher://gopher.club/1/users/whelk/./