|
The true irony that he's the only real believer in evil, and the rest are just petty bureaucrat assholes punching a clock. He really wants to get transcendent in their suffering, really break down their humanity and whats makes him who they are, and the rest just want to bite folks and put things up butts.
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 08:35 |
|
|
They went to the afterlife and became better people, looks like a win for God to me.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Dervyn posted:"Just need the boss man to sign off" is what Michael said when he need Sean's approval for attempt number 2. Wonder what elaborate web of lies that Michael keep spinning in order to keep the experiment continuing. They screwed the first attempt after about 3 months, so one would think Sean would pop in sooner with an inspection. Did anybody narrow down the time range for the 800 odd attemps? The writers said about 3 to 400 years.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2017 16:13
|
|
|
HPanda posted:extenuating circumstances Eleanor sold fake medicine to dying old people. There aren't any.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
HPanda posted:It's a show. There's always potential for something when the info is this incomplete. I mean no there isn't, because the only possible explanation is "we just lied to you and none of that poo poo was real", which isn't like Michael telling them they are in The Good Place when they are really in The Bad Place. That lie has actual evidence of it's falsehood all around [Why is everything so lovely and difficult if they are in heaven?]. Everything we know about them being a lie doesn't re-contextualize anything. It's not clever, and there's no way to pay it off. Making that a twist would just be bad writing, and that still wouldn't make it work. And if her life happened as we saw it, there's no possible justification. At all, ever. She sold fake medicine to sick old people, and was really, really good at it. Her selfishness is almost guaranteed to have a body count.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2017 06:04
|
|
|
HPanda posted:Did they ever reveal how long Eleanor remembers working there? 7 years. What else you got?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2017 06:22
|
|
|
HPanda posted:Mindy St Claire Yeah, that's a character on the show. It's just not an argument for anything, in universe or narratively. Lost really hosed a lot of people up.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2017 06:32
|
|
|
Good people don't do any of that, and only good people make it to The Good Place.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
It's the episode where they confront him, Team Cockroach, it's right before the testicle joke.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
My favorite moment was the little smile Michael gives Elanor when she tells him the Tahani roast was good. Like they are both working to be better people but they really were fundamentally assholes to start with, and that doesn't magically turn off.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2018 22:30
|
|
|
drunken officeparty posted:Pretty sure there is no actual "torture hell" in the 3 major religions and the punishment is to not get to go to heaven and hang out with god. Basically, the official Catholic stance on hell is that God is love and that 'hell' is the complete absence of God. Not dick spiders and endless fire.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
ashpanash posted:No religious iconography of any kind, really. Except for, you know, the demons.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2018 19:51
|
|
|
ashpanash posted:As far as I know, 'demons' are not exclusive to any Abrahamic religion (or religion in general, for that matter). No, they pretty much are in this context of "Torturing dudes in the afterlife". Most other religions don't exactly track in that same moral framework. Or view of the order of the soul, for that matter. You couldn't call Yomi heaven *or* hell. It pretty much sucks for the good and the evil universally until it's time for them to move on from it. Something like Naraka/Diyu isn't an external judgement, exactly, it's just you being weighed down by your karma and needing to be purified before reincarnation. Then you are, and you move on. No 'demons' to speak of really. The Greeks had a system with a "medium place", the Asphodel Meadows. If you weren't great, but also didn't commit any major atrocities or anything, blammo. Of course their good place was reserved for....people the gods liked, which had nothing to do with moral worth of any sort. It also had an extra special heaven, for those that earned the right to enter Elysium but chose to be reincarnated...then did it twice more. So rock out in 4 total lives to the degree you earn access to Heaven, you get to go to Double Heaven. And again, not exactly about the demons. Demons in this context and hell in this context are *profoundly* a Western Christian idea.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
A HUNGRY MOUTH posted:Jason has to be a Good Place plant, he's so friendly and unflappable and always has correct ideas His go to solution to most problems was firebombing things, and he died trying to rob people. He was an affable bad dude. e: Also, you know, EDM. Mulva fucked around with this message at 04:55 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2018 04:13
|
|
|
A HUNGRY MOUTH posted:His firebomb stopped the advance of a crowd of demons who probably cram fire into various holes for breakfast; he's either working for the Good Place, working for the Bad Place, or Gandalf No he's just a jackass from Florida, they are pretty much *that* toxic.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2018 04:55
|
|
|
It's because she poo poo herself in Bridesmaids. That is the joke how do you miss that joke.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
Maya Rudolph. Jameela made a comment on twitter about the guest they got to play the Judge being pants-making GBS threads worthy, and a bunch of people were like "Well I mean she was funny but I don't know if I'd go that far" and it's like she's making a reference to the movie Maya Rudolph was in that had a relatively well known pants making GBS threads scene.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
I can't actually think of a way you could be a bad person in the Good Place. I mean for all we know everyone is in their own segmented perfect reality, where it's impossible to cause harm to another. Even if they weren't, they can't actually cause most forms of harm to anyone else because they are beyond the point of consequences. They are immortal, invulnerable beings. There's no downside to drug abuse or gluttony or making a bunch of imaginary people to brutally torture for that matter. They live in a post-morality existence. Perhaps a Bad Place person can find a way to be Good, but there isn't really any easy to imagine outlet for a Good Place person to be bad.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
tsob posted:It could be like an MMO where some people get their kicks by griefing other occupants, constantly killing them and forcing them to reset their progress on something, blowing up stuff they're trying to do and just generally being nuisances to other residents. Yeah, nobody that finds that fun would ever make it to the Good Place. And it's not the sort of thing you just "get into". precision posted:Finding out that the real Good Place has turned into a Lord of the Flies/hedonistic nightmare seems likely. Eleanor will be like "How did you not NOTICE?!" and Shawn or whoever will be like "It's the Good Place, why would we watch that?" Hedonism only has downsides in a world with consequences. There are no consequences to hedonism in the afterlife. You aren't going to overdose, you aren't going to catch some terrible disease, nobody is going to get pregnant by mistake, you aren't going to end up stealing someone's stereo to pay for your habit. It's easier to imagine terrible people doing better with help than good people just going to poo poo. For all the talk of "The system is broken", Eleanor failed her test until Michael literally guardian angel'ed her rear end on to a better path. At a certain point you are just getting down to "Well if an omniscient being made everyone good, everyone would deserve to be in the Good Place!".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 23:34
|
|
|
navyjack posted:But they explicitly say that doing good things because of reward or punishment doesn’t cut it, you do good to be good. Makes sense that the opposite is true. Doing something lovely even though it won’t actually hurt anybody seems like it would still make you a shittier person. Why is it lovely if it doesn't hurt anyone? Why is it lovely if there are no negative consequences? Why is it lovely if there is literally no downside to anything, anywhere, ever? If you accept some sort of external naughty list as being a real thing with value you are accepting the fundamental conceit of the system in the first place, that some actions just intrinsically have a negative points value. In which case every single one of our main cast members explicitly deserves to burn. If you don't, how can there be bad actions without consequences, and thus how can anyone in the Good Place turn bad? e: tsob posted:If you can get anything at the drop of a hat eventually you'll get bored and it's not hard to imagine bored people turning to spoiling others fun as a way of entertaining themselves. You are thinking like meat. They couldn't even get drunk in the Bad Place Good Place without asking for it especially. That's what a Good Janet could do. You want to not get bored of something? Here's what you do. You say "I don't want to be bored" and you aren't, forever. It's heaven. Mulva fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Feb 3, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2018 00:17
|
|
|
tsob posted:chemical state. quote:whatever hormone You. Are. Thinking. Like. Meat. They don't have real bodies, they aren't processing hormones or chemicals. It's all just affectation. Their minds can rewritten at whim, and have been repeatedly. It's sort of a plot point. There's no reason to let people in heaven be bored, why would you assume they would be?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
Again, you keep thinking like a living person living for eternity. They aren't living people. They are dead, in heaven, with functionally omniscient and omnipotent helpers that can remake them on a whim. There is no requirement that they ever be bored of anything, ever. As in there is no requirement that be a possibility in their psychological make up. Worse than the possibility that the Good Place is just as broken as the Bad Place is the alternative: It's exactly as great as people would want heaven to be, and nearly everyone is denied access to it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
tsob posted:Endlessly repeating "but they could just deciede to not be bored" doesn't answer how their omnipotent and omniscient helpers can make them not bored. Because they are all powerful, and "Don't let them be bored" is effectively the end of it. That's what omnipotent means, all powerful. Not "really powerful but they've done this a bunch and now they are tired, well poo poo guess there is nothing I can do about that". If it helps you get your brain around it, they magic them. They magic them all up in the face and it just works.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2018 01:34
|
|
|
tsob posted:Either the all powerful wizards constantly gently caress with their minds to remove or cover a part of them, which is itself not good Maybe it's the Good Place version of removing an appendix that's about to burst. Something useless that can only hurt you that you'll never notice when it's gone. From what you've said it's just this horrific thing that will cause them nothing but heartache in the long run, and their existence is all long run at this point. I can't see a use for it. thexerox123 posted:Janets are not all-powerful... if they were, the entire problem of the show would be solved by asking them to make the system more fair. Or by asking Janet to take them to The Good Place. They clearly do not have such powers. Janet doesn't do the mind work on the crew, Michael does. And his job doesn't involve being particularly concerned with their mental well being.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2018 02:15
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:They bring up "What We Owe to Each Other" a lot, and I dunno, what I'm reading about contractualism just doesn't seem to work with the show's moral outlook. Of course I don't know much about philosophy, and I barely understand what I'm reading, so maybe I'm the problem. Scanlon's form of contractualism rejects a more static [You might say objectively point based] approach to morality in favor of a rational, situation based one. And isn't as concerned with submission to the state as some forms of contractualism. This by nature makes it a bit abstract, but it's fairly simple: People coming together to work out how to get by in the world. "Wrong" is what anyone working in good faith would reject. "Right" is an action that everyone would accept. That's why it's "contractualism", and 'the social contract". It's what we all make up as we go along to do the best we can as a group, and it involves everyone involved buying in to the central principle. It is literally what the cast is doing each season. They juggle all these competing philosophical ideas with the reality they are in the actual afterlife for realzies, having been judged for their actions [And in the second season with the knowledge they *all* were judged objectively 'wrong' the first time], and in the end they come together as a group to be there for each other and to be better people. Right and wrong, even more basic an idea than good and evil, is a complicated subject. How do we judge the right and wrong of our actions, and how do we go about leading a moral life? And the simpliest way to approach it is to ask that very stark question, "What do we owe to each other?". The answer, simplified and shortened, is to try our best. That's it. If they were going to back any particular moral philosophy for a way forward, they could certainly do a lot worse. Doesn't hurt that it's abstract enough it doesn't have to make any intrinsically troubling statements, and that it's a relatively modern take [Book was only published in 1998, and Scanlon isn't even dead, making him practically a uppity teen rebel in philosophy years]. e: Seriously, if you haven't been dead for two centuries and discredited at least 5 times what the hell are you even doing? Mulva fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Feb 4, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2018 19:10
|
|
|
She does phenomenally good acts, on an increasingly wider scale as time goes on. Like on a global level by the end. Considering how small her acts of pettiness are and how massively she shoots for the stars in doing her best, Leslie with that type of power would be racking up points crazy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2018 12:32
|
|
|
Like her flaws are tiny and her reach was massive, she could probably have committed several genocides and still came out ahead on points.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
Fellatio del Toro posted:It's kind of a weird discussion that seems to misunderstand the thesis of the show The real bullshit Doctor Who worship answer is "The Doctor used time travel to dig the pit in the first place so they'd all come together in the end".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2018 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 08:35 |
|
|
Taear posted:They'd be in the pit and somehow escape using the screwdriver because that's how every modern Who problem is solved. Last time I checked.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2018 16:19
|
|