Ah, nice edit. Did that come off as too arrogant, even for you?

But let's put that and the lovely semantic cherry-picking you've done in an attempt to support one of the most ridiculously arbitrary arguments I've ever heard to one aside, and I'll put to you a scenario:

You have a family member. One day, when they're out walking, a driver hits them with their car. Your family member does not die right away; however, they lose all memory of themselves, their family, their surroundings, and even how to talk and function on a basic human level. Their IQ and basic cognitive ability plummets, they have to learn everything from scratch, they never remember you or anything of who they once were and you were told from the beginning they never will, and they eventually die six months later as a result of the effects the impact had on them.

Would you say they died as a result of the collision? And when would you start to grieve for them?