<i>&gt; I am stealing this.</i><p>You shouldn&#x27;t. I have seen this ideology come up on HN a lot (strangely almost never anywhere else), as an argument against human life extension. If this is <i>your</i> ideology, it&#x27;s of course not productive to argue against it, but if your mind isn&#x27;t made up yet, allow me to very briefly present some bullet point-like counter arguments:<p>Returning a couple of kilograms of mostly-carbon to the environmental cycle isn&#x27;t critically important to nature. In the grand scheme of things, never breaking the old legos is probably not a net loss in a universe filled to the brim with more lego bricks. It&#x27;s hard to make a compelling argument that our mental or cultural landscape would improve if this specific person was removed. Individual minds do have an intrinsic value that is lost when death happens, with little-to-no balancing benefit on the other side.<p>If your primary motivation for a &quot;death is good&quot; paradigm comes from the perception that it&#x27;s the only antidote to overpopulation, there is even more to talk about than would be prudent in this thread, but suffice it to say that over-procreation is due to a faulty feedback loop, and not an inevitable fact of human existence.<p>Of course, you may - and probably do - disagree with this opinion, but it&#x27;s at least something to consider.