Whatever makes you feel happiness is happiness. It's all just chemical responses in your brain when you get down to it. If a TV show gives that to you then good. You should obviously try to diversify the things that make you happy but with the way the world is going take it where you find it.
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2025
62 points (86.9% liked)
No Stupid Questions
42957 readers
437 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Does fake happiness even exist?
If you are happy you are happy.
It would be different to discuss if it would be long term sustainable.
Can you learn truths from fiction? Can you feel sad at a happy memory? Can you long for a person who wronged you? Can a good point he made by a bad person? Why does the source matter?
It’s delusional to be happy because you believe the story is real. It’s not delusional to be happy because the story is happy.
Example: ”We’re so lucky the super heroes saved the world. Imagine what would happen to us if they didn’t”
Happiness is literally the result of chemical reactions in the brain. If you're feeling happy, it's real.
You're running into problems because you're conflating the feeling of happiness with the things that make you feel happy.
There's no such thing as "true happiness" or "false happiness".
The things that make people happy rarely have objective value, and everything comes with some kind of cost, even if it's just time.
The happiness drug users feel is real, but the cost (money/time/health) can be significant. The happiness that you feel from playing games or reading books is real, and the cost (money/time) is less, but still there.
Happiness is always real - just be mindful of the cost!
I would say there is a case to argue it can be a delusion. I would say you don't have the authority to determine to what extent someone enjoys or relates to this delusion.
I saw a conversation on another site and I didn't reply the way I wanted because it would have been insensitive. But that point of view has greater context here. People were talking about the AIDS epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s. I don't know anyone who died from AIDS, or really felt connected to any celebrities who had it. However (especially since you bring up anime in the OP), there is an anime that is generally disliked for a few reasons, some of them valid. Since I am introducing it in this context, I cannot say what the anime is, because the "AIDS angle" is a huge spoiler, and I really don't do spoilers. But it introduces this character near the end of the second season, and this character is all kinds of awesome and inspirational. You find out that what they're doing is due to their time being short... due to AIDS. Or, if we're going off the book those episodes are based on (light novel, not manga), it's actually AIDS and cancer because, like, eff this character in particular, I guess. I don't think I have to tell you how this arc ends. I will say if it were its own thing, if it were adapted separately from that anime with all the baggage, it would stand as one of the great drama series out there, it would have a lot more fans and attention on it.
So now we circle back to the OP's question. If happiness coming from anime (or the other media) is invalid, what about sadness from anime? What if it's an anime character with purple hair who really makes you care about a real-life social issue that doesn't affect anyone you know? Does that make it any less real?
It's not up to me to decide for you. I personally believe those feelings are valid. How you feel, I suppose, depends on factors that matter to you. For example, you might personally know someone who died from AIDS, and you're like "well screw that fictional character, because that disease claimed millions of lives and I'm more affected." But I would argue the story brings awareness. I would not argue that such a person is wrong for feeling that way, though.
If you know what anime I'm talking about, I'd ask that you follow my lead on the spoiler thing and not mention it. But I'm no one's boss here.
It's not even necessarily a delusion. You can be aware that something is fiction and still enjoy it.
Agreed - that's why many people love, say, the Mona Lisa, or Starry Night.
Allow me a question about your premise: If there is such a thing as true happiness, what is false happiness then?
imo, false happiness is something that takes more than it gives. So drugs is good example, maybe they make you feel good but eventually they stop doing that and start taking from you.
They come with a high cost, sure. But this applies to a lot of other things as well (like MTG cards or rescuing animals or learning how play drums really good etc).
with mtg cards, they drain your money so that kind of works too. But rescuing animals or learning something doesnt apply here because it doesnt take anything from you (unless you are kind of insane). Or rather they dont cost too much in terms of invaluable resources like your mental or physical health, just your time which you have to give to everything anyway. Stuff like drugs diminish you being able to enjoy other things and drain your health and relationships. Even if you keep those under control, it still takes something from you, just a bit less.
Though anything can become an addiction too, but if positive things become that then you might have other underlying issues rather than those things themselves causing it.
But none of this matter for the time you were happy.
Another approach: Let's say you make it up to the age of 80 and then you die. You spend 78 years without love - not loving someone, not being loved by someone. But for two years you loved and were loved. Would this mean that this love was not true love just because it wasn't "balanced" enough?
again this does not apply to what i was saying, loving someone doesnt cost you. Frankly i cant tell how you are interpreting me, so i dont know how to clarify what i mean.
I guess "true" and "false" are misleading.
now i'm even more confused
Should I stop?
if you want to, but i'm interested to understand in case i wrote my post in unclear way originally
Usually people regard using drugs as false happiness. Or like having a parasocial relationship with a famous person.
You can either steal a premade chocolate cake or you can bake one yourself. Neither turns the chocolate cake into a true or false one. It's still only a chocolate cake.
I think the concept of “false happiness” is given by the ends result of such behavior. Doing fruits gives you a high, but also addiction, so in the long run it’s bad for you. Having a fake relationship does not allow you to develop a real one, thus being a negative over time. True happiness is something that should make you happy in the moment and in the long run.
For this reason, media is true happiness.
I wad happy reading the lord of the rings and I’m happy I read it. The happiness reading produced has kept being a source of additional happiness. I remember Bilbo’s songs, and think about them when I take a walk. I remember small little details, or big plot points, and I’m happy to remember them. Same can be said about films and video games (I am just less passionate about them, but that’s just me)
True happiness is something that should make you happy in the moment and in the long run.
I'm not sure I agree - why is a long term aspect necessarily for something to constitute true happiness?
If I can't remember something, does that mean it didn't make me "truly happy"?
If so, that would mean that a child given a toy they play with for years but eventually lose interest in and forget as they grow older, didn't experience "true happiness" from that toy, which doesn't seem right to me.
I don't think permanence or longevity are factors in whether ones happiness is true or not.
Good point!
Other hypotheses: we say “true happiness” when it’s sustainable (for a bit) without obvious negative effects. Thus drugs are stereotypically not sustainable and with negative effects, so they are not true happiness [obviously many would disagree, e.g. Baudelaire] and finding true love is true happiness. Thus, stories are also true happiness.
If our feelings are formed by chemicals and waves in the brain, then what would be false about happiness from those sources? Is it actually false happiness, or is it possibly just happiness derived from stigmatized/alternative sources?
Well we hallucinate an experience made from nerve bursts so everything is sort of an illusion for us IMO.
Are you assuming delusions can't make one happy?
Happiness is a release of chemicals to receptors in your brain. If doing something makes you happy, then it makes you happy.
Does using drugs count as true happiness then? Why doesn't everyone just use drugs to be happy forever?
Well yes, that's why people do drugs.
Usually doing it forever runs up against other problems like paying for it, holding down a job or health problems
Why else would people use drugs? The problem is that the side effects from drugs tend to increase unhappiness when you're not on them.
drugs only make you feel happy when you first start, eventually you use them to not feel bad
also when you have a heart attack and almost die and are crippled for life: that’s sad
basically, they only work temporarily and overall
makes shit worse
I would think that delusion and happiness are not mutually exclusive. Even if that happiness you're asking about is a delusion, the persons happiness is still happiness
Humans have always understood our experience through stories and myths. Literally every civilization throughout history has them. It's the people who refuse to consume any fiction that I don't understand. Even when a story is entirely fictional, surely there is still meaning in metaphor and juxtaposition and human understanding to be found.
This sounds like a question for your pastor
Lmao
But the thing is, religious people seem to be miserable in their delusions, I'm not even sure what the point of religion is, if they are just gonna be afraid of hell all the time.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Reading a story that brings happiness is real happiness.
Most often, when I finish a good book, usually one that has altered my world view, or changed some aspect of thinking, is profound, absolutely can even bring joy. The sustained feelings from the thoughts that came from the media are real. If they are happy and joyful thoughts they are real, if they are negative, the emotion is real.
To be delusional in this aspect, you'd have to see the peice of fiction as real life, as in, you may meet the fictional character one day so you are happy at that chance to meet them.
I remember being young and trying to over analyze this stuff as if it'll give me something. Meanwhile my brother was chugging beers on a golf course. It's a good feeling to stop at times and just fucking live. The worst thing is when you start these questions, watch some documentary and read a couple books. Then 8 years later you find those were all bullshit Michael Moore type creations and everything you built your belief on for a decade was nonsense
Are you truly happy? Then that's true happiness, however you got there...
Are you not? Then it's not, however you got there...
depends how you are enjoying them. If you are delusional and think the stories are real or something, I guess its just that its pretty fragile happiness which might cause harm to maintain it. If you are just enjoying the experiencing those stories then there is nothing negative in that. Ultimately its about how much good does something bring to your life.
Who cares about how it looks to others, unless you are causing harm.
Yes, happiness generated by relaxing, by engaging the imagination, by solving puzzles that don't apply to real life, and by empathizing with fictional characters is still happiness. But being happy isn't the same as being healthy, and you need more than media for that.
Whilst i think happiness derived from fiction is real, I would refrain from letting it be my only source of happiness.
I could think of a million things in the world that i would like to do if I hade the resources to do them. None of them are fictional. But i can experience a glimpse of them through fiction.
I agree on the first part, I am unsure about the meaning of the second one. Reading a book is for me a great source of happiness, and I wouldn’t completely replace it even given infinite resources.
load more comments
(1 replies)
the happiness is real. how you got happy may not be real and sometimes, may not matter in the long run.
I think you're going to have to provide a generally acceptable definition of "true happiness" - and a definition that isn't contingent on the points raised in your question.
view more: next ›