system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Suffering is Not Necessary for Happiness

We've all heard the sentiment that, "You need to experience sadness to know happiness", but I think this is nonsense.

First of all, happiness (or any emotion) can exist on its own as a product of our mental / brain states. Emotions depend on what is going on in our heads, and a hypothetical neurological system productive of happiness could exist suddenly never having experienced suffering before. This is an assertion I'm making on admittedly vague notions of mental function and sentience, so I'm sure there will at least be something to refute, correct, or add.

Although we may appreciate happiness more when reflecting back on times of suffering, that is just another layer of emotion as a result of second-order metacognition, thinking about one's own mood. Happiness can exist without this appreciation from many other sources like satisfying one's bodily needs, making friendships, enjoying existence, etc.
gpt
You just get bored of the same feeling no matter what the feeling might be, you always have to "up" the feeling.

Tolerance works the same on emotion because "happy" and such are just chemical indicators in your brain. 

If you were literally always "Happy" your brain would build tolerance to dopamine and other chemicals, and you would have to up it in order to feel it.

That's a cycle that cannot self sustain.  So you can't feel 'happy' without the lack of 'happy'.  Your brain would simply get used to a new baseline of chemicals and you would have to up those chemicals in order to feel 'happy' forever until you simply just die from overdoses of the chemicals, or more likely you just become incapable of the uptake of those chemicals, which would be very dreadful... until your body becomes used to a new baseline... and then you can do it all over.