Came across a discussion between CNN and Dan Gilbert on subject of “happiness”. Very interesting to read…Of late, I have been telling to some friends of mine (like this) about the non-uniqueness of feelings. It didn’t occur to me in terms of how each of us perceive happiness, rather it was more of an explanation on why some feel certain things (feelings) which aren’t perceived as applicable to others. I felt two things:
- Such perception (some feelings aren’t applicable to others) is wrong.
- That the MY-FEELINGS-ARE-UNIQUE property is the root cause of such perception.
This thought doesn’t imply the non-uniqueness of individuals. This just means that I can fully appreciate, empathize and feel some one else’s feelings (whether that person related to me or not is moot).
After all, I do yearn and wish for a couple in love, say in a movie, to be together forever!! Why?? I don’t know…but their (the couple’s) feeling isn’t alien to me, it isn’t something which I cannot feel and it isn’t something that I can ignore because it is just a movie. What I am trying to say is this: Accept the feelings, however insignificant it is. After all, such feelings make us what we are. There is nothing wrong in shedding a few drops of tears for someone else whom you don’t know or even hate. On the same vein, do share them – your feelings are not out of the world – they are perfectly understandable.
I never realized that this can be seen as a generic idea about an intriguing psychological phenomenon like “happiness”. After reading what Dan has to say, I am curious….Hopefully, some day, I’ll make a chance for myself to venture into these stuff and make something out of it.
PS: When I use the word ‘happiness’, I intend to convey both ‘happiness’ or ‘sadness’. Like the photons which happily stay as a particle as well as a wave, lots of our feelings exhibit duality. We coin separate words for such feelings, but they are the same, aren’t they?