Hacker News Reader

Obviously you try to explain, but what was objected to above is making excuses for death. Death sucks, and trying to pretend there's some good to balance that out is a lie.

That said, I'm not a parent, and I realise it's easier to be idealistic in theory.

View on HN

But there _is_ some good to balance death out, it's called life. And the lego analogy captures this idea perfectly and quite appropriately for a 5-year-old.

Actually, all of life is contingent on death, not just the good in it. We sustain ourselves by consuming other dead beings, be it animals, plants, fungi, etc. They themselves lived thanks to the death of other beings and so on.

The lego analogy expresses the fact that we are not different from these other beings, and that we too must die so that life can continue. The death of an individual in this chain is always painful, but as part of the whole, it is just as it should be.

> "It's the circle of life..." - King Mufasa

That's not what I meant. The good in life is not inherently contingent on death.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com