I said "the opposite is true" because I don't think any experience is inherently the same as another.

This comes from Tolstoy's observation about it in War & Peace?

↪Outlander This comes from Tolstoy's observation about it in War & Peace? — Benkei

If it does, it somewhat betrays Tolstoy's meaning, which is that there is no drama in a happy family; this relays the same observation that is made about "the News" - that good news is always boring, as also illustrated in every fairytale ending - "... and they all lived happily ever after." Contentment is the background normal life that drama interrupts, but not because it is one dimensional or 'the same', it simply requires no response, and sets no challenge. And that is what makes it appear one dimensional from the outside.

Does one not also get compassion fatigue when disaster becomes the normal condition? Another bombed hospital, glad I'm not there.

Depression/anhedonia as a sort of locked flat state without the alternation of good emotion, could be characterized as one dimensional. Though even here there is a rhythm of what the mind presents to itself in pulses of exacerbating negativity as a vicious circle, as if one had an itchy wound which when scratched causes both relief and new pain. Maybe sadism/masochsim could be means for such folks to find relief by emotional alternation, or as an solution for a dullness which seems at times intolerable.

Happy lives perhaps are full of wonderful dynamism, balanced in a natural cycle of highs and lows. Contentment pursues itself, not without challenge; it just hasn't been upended and forever frustrated by intractable problems/situations or a perpetual feeling of doom.

Sorrow all looks pretty much the same; anger all looks pretty much the same; amusement all looks pretty much the same: emotions in humans are expressed in the same physiological responses.
But, though everyone may shed a tear and let their features droop when they are sad, an individual does not experience every instance of sorrow in the same way, or with the same intensity or for same length of time. And if our personal experience of emotions is unique to each instance, how much more varied are the experiences of different people?
No, emotions, either positive or negative, cannot be lumped in buckets.

Sorrow all looks pretty much the same; anger all looks pretty much the same; amusement all looks pretty much the same: emotions in humans are expressed in the same physiological responses. — Vera Mont

I don't see this one in my experience.

But:

No, emotions, either positive or negative, cannot be lumped in buckets. — Vera Mont

I think somewhat misunderstands emotions. At base, we have either aversions or affinity behaviours. Are we wanting to say that emotions are secondary to these directives, or that they are, in themselves, constituents of the direction (direction being the positive/negative on an experience spectrum, let's say)?

If the former, doesn't really do anything to even mention emotions other than as a description explanation of one's specific mindstate. If the latter, it seems to be that 'emotions' are just the circumstantial manifestation of a bare positive or negative valence (which, admittedly would put more truck into you " emotions in humans are expressed in the same physiological responses" - otherwise, it would be very hard to account for the apparent, pretty overwhelming, element of shared emotional states) which, I think might not capture what most consider 'emotions'. 'Sadness' probably isn;t it's own mindstate, for instance).

While all tragedy/suffering/negative emotion is poignantly unique (and as such has a capacity for emotional and intellectual depths unrivaled by even the deepest of oceans).

Agree or disagree? — Outlander

How could we demonstrate that this is the case?

That's what it is. yes!

All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. — Leo Tolstoy

Haven't read the book, must've just gleaned it from somewhere or someone who did online.

If it does, it somewhat betrays Tolstoy's meaning, which is that there is no drama in a happy family; this relays the same observation that is made about "the News" - that good news is always boring, as also illustrated in every fairytale ending - "... and they all lived happily ever after." Contentment is the background normal life that drama interrupts, but not because it is one dimensional or 'the same', it simply requires no response, and sets no challenge. And that is what makes it appear one dimensional from the outside.

Does one not also get compassion fatigue when disaster becomes the normal condition? Another bombed hospital, glad I'm not there. — unenlightened

How could we demonstrate that this is the case? — Tom Storm

The above reply (and others) gives really good insight into the frame of mind/thinking that led me to ponder the topic.

Obviously every mind is different, but generally-speaking what do we (or most) want out of life or consider "desirable" or "great to have"? Naturally our biological needs met (food, water, shelter), perhaps tying in with being "well off" so to speak finance-wise (your favorite foods always on hand, a decent perhaps even luxurious abode, enough money in the bank for an extravagant vacation, or several, etc). For many to be well-liked and respected by one's peers (at least peers who one desires to be around, that is), often owing to some sort of accomplishment or cultured, tangible skill one has, perhaps one widely considered of "use" and of positive benefit to society (ie. a beloved school teacher or educated doctor, etc). Along those lines being successful in romantic or family relationships be it a "smooth bachelor" who is successful with the opposite sex or just a cherished father or mother figure in one's own healthy household perhaps. Stuff like that seems to rank high as far as such qualities that are desired in life.

To answer your question, I would say, to me, all that becomes "normal" after a while. It's like, "Okay, so you're a success then. So what?" in a way of speaking. Lots of people are, that doesn't make you a good person nor guarantee you a fulfilling life (though understandably it most likely will). Or take other positive experiences, catching a fish or coming in first place in a competition, even one you worked and trained very hard on for a lengthy period of time thus compounding an otherwise hollow success with that extra dynamic of accomplishment (I overcame what others could not, and am a better person mentally and physically as a result). It seems at least (and again the point of "observation bias" or what have you unenlightened brought up rings true to me) it's comparable to just about any other positive experience anyone experiences whether it's an infant playing a game of peekaboo, a child beating a video game, a teenager passing his driver's ed exam (I suppose those are poor examples seeing as they unlock entire swathes of life that were previously unavailable and count as a milestone), or a young adult "scoring" as they say, an engineer completing a project they've been at for a while, etc. I'd say it can be said that what all these things have in common is a primal feeling of "mastery" over something that, while it may make one ecstatic, becomes much less so rather quickly, especially given time or exposure to other more difficult and rewarding challenges or opportunities.

Probably rambling a bit, so to take the source quote "Every happy family is the same", to me, makes sense. You have a healthy, happy home, minimal conflict, and life is good. That to me seems "standard" or, not to say boring, but what some would call "vanilla", I suppose. Nothing wrong with that, at all, it just seems to fit the quote in question. Whereas an unhappy family can be caused by a multitude of things, not just the usual stuff (conflict, financial woes, extramarital affairs, trouble with the law, kids not performing well at school, etc) but less typical stuff like say a dark family secret, fight over an inheritance, a failing business one's life savings was invested in, maybe a rare illness, etc. I guess it just seems to me there's always more "going on" when it comes to a negative experience or circumstance than a happy positive one where basically nothing is "going on" or like was said "requires no response" and "sets no challenge". If that makes sense.

I guess it just seems to me there's always more "going on" when it comes to a negative experience or circumstance than a happy positive one where basically nothing is "going on" or like was said "requires no response" and "sets no challenge". — Outlander

One could just as well affirm the opposite of this. Some states of first world discomfort, the emptiness of modern material life from the perspective of a depressed person, "require no response" and "set no challenge" if everything worth pursuing has been given up on. There is no energy left beyond the rutted work of the high standard of our wealthy subsistence (eat, sleep, work, repeat). That is pretty dull.

Though one could characterize the battle to hold on and keep pushing that rock up the hill as a challenge too, to strive against the final surrender to the unknown or the fear of a downward spiral, becoming those sad, forgotten people on the street.

It sounds like a state which "requires no response" and "sets no challenge" isn't really a contented one. Hedonic adaptation is possibly a big complicating factor of our human experience. I think it is going to destroy society (ongoing). One can become accustomed/jaded to ever new levels of experience. I always think about Peter Thiel in this regard of boundless desire. He has 5 billion dollars in a tax free Roth IRA and yet has some weird motivation to mold the world according to his immoral Libertarian dream (that the world should belong to those who can take/shape it and flavors of "might makes right"). There is definitely something wrong with Thiel and maybe it is that he is deeply unhappy. He needs to forever ascend to new challenges, no matter how terrible they seem to us.

The people who promote unhappiness as the superior state don't seem to understand how much effort and commitment goes into maintaining a positive state.

Once you've lost; you're in tragedy and despair, you can simply wallow for as long as it takes to muster your resources to meet whatever the challenge is. When you're where you have aspired to be, it takes eternal vigilance, punctuated by occasional heroic acts to keep and defend what you have.
That movie takes more subtle treatment than one about struggle and loss; no overt facile drama to depict.