Re ending - while it probably alludes to the fact that we need community to feel better - expecting another person to be able to help you with your emotional state (or expecting from yourself that you might be able to fix someone's emotional state) is a slippery slope.

One might argue that if someone is appreciated on the basis of whether that person makes one feel good in the moment - they are being treated no different than a drug (alcohol, etc). Some argue that such unhealthy dependencies on soothing agents (drugs or people) stems from lack of self soothing skills. Apparently, most "happy healthy people" (there are ofc caveats with this definition but for arguments sake let's assume that we share some understanding of what that means) have an intuitive understanding of how to take care of themselves both physically and emotionally in ways that return them to a baseline state of sorts. If you lack such skills, you often resort to less healthy coping strategies to draw yourself towards this baseline state.

Funny quote from sir Terry Pratchett: Death: "THERE ARE BETTER THINGS IN THE WORLD THAN ALCOHOL, ALBERT." Albert: "Oh, yes, sir. But alcohol sort of compensates for not getting them."

> One might argue that if someone is appreciated on the basis of whether that person makes one feel good in the moment - they are being treated no different than a drug (alcohol, etc).

I think this is a very consumer-centric reductionist way to look at human interaction.

We are a social species and have been so for millions of years. Social connection and interaction is deeply encoded into our genes. We have dedicated cranial hardware for recognizing faces and emotions in others. We have a complex larynx and tongue entirely so that we can make sounds that convey meaning to other humans.

Given that, it's entirely reasonable to state that we need human connection not as a drug-like balm to cover a failure to be a sufficiently hardcore individualist, but because that as what it means to be human. You wouldn't say a worker ant dying on its own is a failed ant. Ants need their colonies to be ants. We need our tribes to be people.

> One might argue that if someone is appreciated on the basis of whether that person makes one feel good in the moment - they are being treated no different than a drug

The efficacy of psychology can vary widely with each party - both the patient and the helper.

While mood-altering drugs are more consistent in general, their effects degrade, depending where one is on the usage timeline (1st use, 10th, 100th).

I use Kratom to somewhat dull the effects of mild anxiety. It is enough to preserve general functionality - and that, in-turn, makes causes (of anxiety) less forbidding to consider.

Doing this means I tend to live in a '10th use' space. To preserve that benefit, I don't try to increase dosage if I venture into distress territory. My current regimen is helpful or it isn't.