You know when you're walking down a deserted path, and you can't hear or see anyone else, or even see any evidence of another soul anywhere nearby? You know that quiet isolation that makes your ears sing with silence?
Imagine an entire lifetime spent in that silence.
Not silence of the physical kind, but silence of the interaction kind. No conversations with other human beings, only the hunt for the food you crave. No smiling and being smiled back at, just the crackle of the fire as you cook the object of your hunt. No customary greeting, only the running of water through your hands as you scoop it from the river to drink.
Could you wake up every single day as the only human being on the planet, and be happy?
Does happiness at its core really require others, or can it be had through simple solitary being? The question is not whether you'd be able to answer "yes" right now (having been raised in societal conditions, you probably couldn't), but rather whether it is technically possible to be happy without others. Is it?
I want to believe that it is. I'm disturbed by the notion that another person (or persons) can affect my happiness. Let me rephrase: I'm disturbed by the notion of anyone other than myself having any effect whatsoever (whether positive or negative) on my happiness. It's simple really: rationally, I want my reason to be the only determinant of the purpose of my life, and thus my happiness. It's like Ayn Rand said in her definition of objectivism:
My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.
OK, so it's a noble concept (at least, it seems noble; and a concept which I continue to believe in) to be the master of your own destiny, but does being the master of your own destiny imply that mastering can be accomplished without others?
I don't know... Do you?
Oh wait, you're not there.