X-Message-Number: 12771
From: Daniel Ust <>
Subject: Re: Lack of Closure
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 12:48:06 -0500

On Sat, 13 Nov 1999 12:04:15 -0500 (EST) Charles Platt 
<mailto:>  wrote:
>The problem is especially acute where a relatively young person loses a
spouse or 
>significant other. To what extent does the survivor retain a primary
loyalty to the person 
>who has been cryopreserved? I have seen at least one person deeply affected
by this 
>uncertainty. Should the survivor become involved with someone else?
Presumably, yes; 
>but if the "someone else" signs up for cryonics, we have the prospect of
all three people 
>eventually being cryopreserved, and emerging together at some point in the
future. When 
>I proposed this dilemma to Keith Henson years ago, he said the answer was
simple: After 
>resuscitation, if we have, say, one husband and two wives, simply grow or
build an extra 
>copy of the husband.  I tend to feel however that even if this is possible,
it will complicate, 
>rather than resolve, the issue, since both copies are likely to feel the
same conflicted 
>loyalty, and both may be oriented more toward one wife than the other, thus
creating a 
>SECOND romantic triangle.

I agree with Charles Platt here.  Even so, life is full of things like this.
People who think cryonics, which is a just another _potential_ method of
extending life span, or future technology will solve all of these issues are
most likely wrong and unlikely to be prepared for such things.  That said,
like Marty Kardon, I'd rather have a deceased loved one cryopreserved and
deal with the complications involved - if financial costs were no concern -
than just know he or she is dead in the conventional sense.

Perhaps what might be helpful here is to consult an literature on missing
persons, since that is probably the closest thing psychologically we have to
cryonics.  A person who is missing for a long time - a year or longer - is
often presumed to be dead and her or his loved ones often hanker for
closure.  Perhaps that would speak more closely to Kardon's concerns.

As for Keith Henson's solution - if indeed that is what he proposed - I find
it silly.

Cheers!

Daniel Ust
http://mars.superlink.net/neptune/ <http://mars.superlink.net/neptune/> 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12771