In spite of their individuality, the facts of life come to generality because of their association.
‘One day after another’, ‘one act after another’ are not expressions that name a successive ordering of some elements with the same vivid force. Surely, each element looses its force as an irreducible individual item, though it remains the same individual element.
Thus, the explanation of generality as an abstraction of common features does not function at least in the case of the facts of life.
As a consequence, there would not be permitted to speak about a life as a panel of equally vivid elements and neither as a matter from which we can abstract common features.
However, the bibliographical records often commit to the first way of speaking about a life, while general accounts of humanity prefer the second.
More adequate than both ways it is a discourse that would attempt to describe a life by noticing its permanent fading because of the succession of its facts. It could be a continual fading for raising more clearly the goal we living for (for instance, the life of a philosopher progressively disappears behind his or her works) or the world in which one lives.