Phyllis Clayton, 58 dies of heart attack after getting a covid vaccine.

Let me give you a little refresher of third grade math.

I don't consider a death a 'tragedy' when it was avoidable, whatever the cause. An innocent person killed by a drunk driver = tragedy. A drunk driver who kills himself in an accident does not equal tragedy. Avoidable. Sad and regrettable, but not tragic.

Clear enough for you? I'm not going to repeat myself again, so I'm done.

I would clash with right wing extremism more except it has been a long time since we have had a conservative with arguments intelligent enough to argue with.

It is tragic when any human being dies of covid.
That is the whole point of this thread. I think it is an important point.

You didn't answer my question...

Clear enough for you? I'm not going to repeat myself again, so I'm done.

maxdancona wrote:

I would clash with right wing extremism more except it has been a long time since we have had a conservative with arguments intelligent enough to argue with.

Nonsense. I've provided you with lots of intelligent arguments. You always run and hide from my arguments.

No, for the last time, it's not tragic if it were avoidable.

Thank you. If you treat people dying of breast cancer the same as people dying of covid, then at least you are being logically consistent.

So if Stalin died from covid you would consider it tragic?

You are spiking the football (over covid deaths). I don't really know how to respond.

Do you need a Venn diagram?

The death of an ordinary person who has never murdered millions of innocent people is always a tragedy.

Life has a natural cycle: we are born, grow up, age, and then die — no-one has yet been able to cheat death. That natural cycle incorporates both happiness and sadness. The passing of my father and those of my friends followed this order — they lived mostly full lives and saw grandchildren and great-grandchildren – and they were buried by their children.

Tragedy, on the other hand, is an event that breaks with the natural order — such as when parents bury children, and leave young spouses and orphans. When a tragedy befalls us or our loved ones, we are left shocked.

This juxtaposition of sad and tragic can help us understand the critical distinction between them is qualitative rather than quantitative. That means there is no progression from sad to tragic — that some things are less sad, some more sad, and some so sad as to be deemed tragic. Rather, tragic is something entirely different, and our emotional response is therefore very different.

Because sad is part of the natural cycle of life and death, it’s OK to be sad when an old person leaves this world, and within the feelings of sadness, to find acceptance (i.e., not to feel sad about feeling sad). “They had lived a full life”, “It was their time”. That sadness eases with the passage of time, and is readily comforted. A few months ago, a friend’s elderly mother died, and on the same day his daughter gave birth to a baby girl. His sadness was tempered with joy, and an acceptance that life and death are all part of the cycle.

Tragedy, on the other hand, smashes through the natural cycle and leaves us shocked and numb, questioning God, and wondering how we can deal with such a loss. It evokes very different emotional responses. The after-effects of tragedy can stay with us for years, and profoundly impact the lives of those closest to it. Years later, its recall can quickly bring back the visceral responses we experienced at the time.