it as an insignificant and ignorant being. "It was as if someone had taken a tiny bead of pure life and decking it as lightly as possible with down and feathers, had set it dancing and zigzagging to show us the true nature of life."
Her refusal to understand the universality and equality of the cycle of life and death is what makes such a conclusion, however eloquent and thought-provoking, incorrect. One could say that rather one force being stronger than the other, they are simultaneous and complimentary components within the entire span of existence.A mouse dies in the claws of a cat, the cat lives on to give birth to kittens; a cow consumes a plant, but it's defecation provides the service of fertilizer for remaining plants, and at one point the animal's corpse will nourish the surrounding dirt of the its grave; a person will be killed by a virus that will continue to live on by triumphing over a host, but this supposed destroyer of life minimizes the increase in overpopulation and thus promotes healthier population densities and immune systems with better adaptations for defense; even the thorough breakdown of entities in outer space will arrive at a time of merging into a new form of existence, such as when a fragment of the Earth will compose the moon or when the supposed explosion of a condition with such concentration of heat and intensity produced all dust particles that later assumed the shape and structure of everything existing.