In response to Cameron Hamlet's question "Would you rather have an evenly happy/sad life or extremely happy and extremely sad life?

I believe I would rather live an equally happy/sad life instead of an extreme one or the other. First of all who in their right mind would want to be extremely sad or in other words depressed all the time. In this constant state one would probably need some kind of medication otherwise they would run a high risk of suicide.

Being on the other side of the spectrum...being extremely happy all the time could also be potentially problematic. Something that comes to mind is does extremely happy mean extremely energetic; if so isn't this what we diagnosis as A.D.D. or A.D.H.D. Again if this is the case then one would probably be prescribed some kind of medication to "bring them down". Which leads me to my next comment...notice how for both extremes one would be given some kind of medication in order to bring them closer to the middle; so wouldn't be all be better off just living lives in the middle...equally happy and sad...if we could control our emotions to that extreme?

It seems to me that society as a whole has already answered this question based on how they treat the extremes or the outliers. As a society it seems we want everyone to be as close to equally happy and sad as possible.

Question:

Is there a reason for this...If we were constantly one emotion would we be able to feel and sympathize for people of other emotions??