You’re missing the even broader context. The article is explicitly discussing “happiness” and why the author isn’t happy despite being “successful” by traditional measures.
Further, some of the issue is with the imprecise definition of “happy”. The modern use of the term can be used interchangeably. What causes someone to be hedonically happy may make them eudaimonically unhappy. So IMO it’s completely warranted to have further discussion to either define the definition or bring into question if someone is chasing the right goal for them. Saying what is tantamount to “I’m not willing to discuss this” facilitates none of that.
Further, some of the issue is with the imprecise definition of “happy”. The modern use of the term can be used interchangeably. What causes someone to be hedonically happy may make them eudaimonically unhappy. So IMO it’s completely warranted to have further discussion to either define the definition or bring into question if someone is chasing the right goal for them. Saying what is tantamount to “I’m not willing to discuss this” facilitates none of that.