|
SardonicTyrant posted:The Medium Place gives you a connection to SA, but no plat or upgrades and your avatar costs twice as much to change. Also you can only post in PYF
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 07:22 |
|
|
Rarity posted:No SA is definitely part of The Bad Place
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
Heavy_D posted:Also you can only post in PYF
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 23:55
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:*sighs, reaches for reset button* FactsAreUseless: Man, this is a real low point. Yeah, this one hurts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
Rarity posted:FactsAreUseless: Man, this is a real low point. Yeah, this one hurts. That was my favorite of the reboot montages. Well, either that, or the one where Eleanor overheard the plot because the door was unlocked. ... ... naaaaah, it's definitely the one where Jason figured it out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 01:55
|
|
|
tarlibone posted:... naaaaah, it's definitely the one where Jason figured it out. It was a real low point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4dqFiL3hIY
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 15:44
|
|
|
tarlibone posted:That was my favorite of the reboot montages. Well, either that, or the one where Eleanor overheard the plot because the door was unlocked. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 16:16
|
|
|
tarlibone posted:That was my favorite of the reboot montages. Well, either that, or the one where Eleanor overheard the plot because the door was unlocked. For me it was when Eleanor was standing in the cactus field holding balloons. Just the random ridiculousness of it all still makes me giggle. I also want to how how that part fit into Michael's grand scheme lol.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
 The Good Place BRADY BUNCH Promo Sweatshirt ONLY GIVEN TO GUESTS AT EMMY PARTY “New and unused straight from the swag table at the Good Place!” quote:Offered here is a rare collectible for fans of THE GOOD PLACE. It's a spiffy "Brady Bunch" parody sweatshirt that's modeled on the "Brain-y Bunch" costume prop that appeared on a third season episode of The Good Place.      At $49.98 (+$12.08 shipping,) it's a bit too rich for my blood, but one of you fat dinks has to buy this please. And then please shoot some proper damned photos of it
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 02:59
|
|
|
pwn posted:
Yeah it’s a bit much for me but I love it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
If it were anything close to my size, I'd be tempted.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 03:40
|
|
|
Just mainlined the show, super fun. Well, most of the show was. Season 3 kinda dragged when everybody was on Earth, especially for the episodes where Jason didn't have much to do. But I'm having a little trouble with their explanation as to why nobody at all got into the good place in the last 521 (522 now?) years. As far as I can tell, pretty clearly it's a post-Columbus/colonialism reference, which is a smart thing to refer to from a morality perspective. Implications of being morally complicit with slavery and global domination and exploitation and all that. Got it, on board with the idea that that stuff is bad. Also fits in nicely with what Janet said about Columbus in season 1. You get involved with that stuff in any way, and a morality-based points system designed before then could very well say you're a dink, even if it's just by benefiting in a relatively minor way from it (the tomato example or worse). So, at least for the moment, let's say that every European within a few years of Columbus stuff is somehow morally complicit in colonialism, and (albeit unwillingly) most/all the places contacted by Europe and/or conquered by the Europeans also become complicit (this I'm less sold on, but again: let's pretend this makes sense) even if it's just by being conquered and having anything of value (to Europeans) taken by Europeans to further the colonial project. That being said, what about the isolated tribes that don't get contacted for centuries, whose inhabitants not only never meet a European or contacted person for their entire lives, but who also never meet anyone else who's European or been contacted either? Are we supposed to assume that every single inhabitant of those places for the duration that they went without contact with Europe/Europe's conquests was too lovely for the Good Place?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 18:09
|
|
|
Only thing I could venture (besides a miss by Schur) is that any tribe still isolated isn't making the best use of their time/abilities in a world that could resolve the various preventable issues that isolated tribe would have. Basically, culpability via inaction, which would be another way of underlining the system is broken and unfair in its scoring. Basically, yes they should get in, but the system is scored impossibly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 18:28
|
|
|
Ultraklystron posted:Only thing I could venture (besides a miss by Schur) is that any tribe still isolated isn't making the best use of their time/abilities in a world that could resolve the various preventable issues that isolated tribe would have. Basically, culpability via inaction, which would be another way of underlining the system is broken and unfair in its scoring. The show went for an Evil Butterfly Effect answer. So when a man in an isolated pre-industrial village chops down a tree to make firewood for his family he's losing points for destroying the habitat for the animals that lived there, harming the animals that fed on the animals in that habitat, and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere by burning the tree, and all of his family who eat food cooked over that fire are also losing points because of benefitting from his evil works and they're losing points because the food was not sustainably harvested, etc. edit: This sort of logic distorts decision making in the real world. You'll occasionally see economic analysis like "Why (environmental initiative) is bad!" and often the way they get there is by putting more and more on the left side of the ledger, so they include the energy to make the tractor the farmer rides, the energy to make the factory where the tractor is made is, etc and voila everything is evil. Gobbeldygook fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Jun 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 18:39
|
|
|
I think Schur said, and the show implied, that even if you're an extreme hippie recluse like Doug, or from an isolated tribe untouched by capitalism, you also need to do massive amounts of good that affect many many people to get enough points. Avoiding the bad isn't sufficient.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 18:50
|
|
|
Argue posted:I think Schur said, and the show implied, that even if you're an extreme hippie recluse like Doug, or from an isolated tribe untouched by capitalism, you also need to do massive amounts of good that affect many many people to get enough points. Avoiding the bad isn't sufficient. But that's not how the show explained it. Five hundred years ago, giving somebody flowers (for a European) was about 140 points and the implications were relatively uncomplicated. Giving somebody flowers now also involves the issues of modern society (negative points for pesticides, exploitation of migrant workers, etc.). Some of those implications will still hold true for Doug's actions, who lives in modern Canada and interacts with modern Canada even if he does so in as morally forthright a way as he can think to (maybe there's something deeply wrong with the snail foundation, or he's done bad things as a result of somebody saying it would make them happy if he did them, for example). And, just for fun, let's assume that the point threshhold is something like a million or 1.5 million. That seems to be somewhere around what the show has implied gets you into the Good Place. You can bump that up if you like, but we have to assume that some people were able to hit it before 1500 AD. So, (assuming the 1-1.5 million point scale) something on the order of ten thousand acts over a lifetime of the point value of the flower example and you get to the Good Place (plus enough to outweigh whatever bad stuff you do) as long as the act is uncomplicated by other factors. I don't recall any of those negative points of giving somebody flowers being 'didn't solve world hunger' or 'didn't end modern slavery' or 'scaled down because there are more people in the world now than there used to be.' In other words, it doesn't seem like the requirements for doing positive things in the world have changed based on population or even overall number or size of unrelated problems, but rather that you have to do more of them in modern society to outweigh the bad stuff that's happening in society directly related to that action. Again, tomato and all that. So, while it would certainly be hard to get into the Good Place, a pre-contact person (even in the contemporary world) doesn't seem like they're being held to any stricter moral standard than a pre-colonialism European person. So the question stands: why haven't any gotten in for the past five hundred years? Further question: if the standards have always been both uncomplicated morally good actions and helping a massive number of people, wouldn't they know immediately that they hosed up the system, given that nobody would get in until there was some way to help massive amounts of people? Comparatively speaking, I don't think Jesus would qualify for that standard (as in: he did a bunch of great, uncomplicatedly nice things, but generally only on a small scale unless you want to get really abstract about spreading a religion that is 95% wrong in the show's canon), so I have trouble thinking of anybody who would ever have gotten into the Good Place.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
Buried among Michael's lies in season 1 was the probably true fact that you needed an insane amount of points to get in, and that even a lot of people you'd think would get in, didn't. Of course, we know now there are bigger reasons for that, but those factoids he dropped on Eleanor could easily have been rooted in the truth, that the point requirement is unreasonably high. And here's Schur on the matter: quote:Even if the world has become much more ethically complex, couldn’t someone who lives in an isolated, indigenous community avoid most of those conflicts and still rack up enough points to get in?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
Argue posted:Buried among Michael's lies in season 1 was the probably true fact that you needed an insane amount of points to get in, and that even a lot of people you'd think would get in, didn't. Of course, we know now there are bigger reasons for that, but those factoids he dropped on Eleanor could easily have been rooted in the truth, that the point requirement is unreasonably high. So basically the probability of getting enough points to get into the good place decreases inversely to the global population. E.G. if there are 5 billion people on Earth versus 500,000, you have to improve the lives of thousands of people instead of say, hundreds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 02:30
|
|
|
Why does Schur think Doug's life is morally equivalent to that of a member of an uncontacted tribe? Uncontacted tribes are these people who literally have never and may never meet a person from a developed nation or even a developing nation in their lives. Doug is a Canadian who kinda-sorta dropped off the grid, who both knows about the developed world and interacts with it to the extent that he can deliver lentils to a pro-snail organization. Schur's answer (to a question he technically didn't get asked in the quoted context) doesn't say that the amount of people you affect has to be greater in the contemporary world than it was five hundred years ago, but more that Doug's actions are still likely to have unintended consequences because he's part of modern society and that in that sense is still likely to screw up when he tries to do good. Plus he started in his 20s, which gives him a disadvantage, whereas an uncontacted person was never part of modern society. It seems to me that the increased difficulties of getting into the Good Place are relevant only to people who have contact with the 'modern world.' Unless, of course, the Good Place should be completely empty. That's the theory I happen to prefer. Because the alternative is just taking the evils of modern society as mild annoyances that nobody can do anything about and expecting the universe to grade us easier because change is hard. teamcharlie fucked around with this message at 02:56 on Jun 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 02:52
|
|
|
pwn posted:
My birthday is next week... Hmm...
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 03:35
|
|
|
i bet that the current explanation of the points system will get blown up in S4E1 before the first commercial break
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 04:07
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:i bet that the current explanation of the points system will get blown up in S4E1 before the first commercial break Sounds awesome to me. I'd honestly rather they bring it back to being vague and just sort of a lurking problem that the afterlife or the perception of the main characters of it is screwed up in some way than use their current half-assed explanation. teamcharlie fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Jun 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 04:58
|
|
|
It's going to be tricky, because while I have faith in Schur you also don't want them to go too far into the idea that if you aren't directly making something happen you have no responsibility.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 05:07
|
|
|
I don't think it's necessarily a set of fixed absolute rules, just remember that:
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 05:17
|
|
|
Senor Tron posted:It's going to be tricky, because while I have faith in Schur you also don't want them to go too far into the idea that if you aren't directly making something happen you have no responsibility. this show and thread is an excellent shibboleth for determining which goons have ever studied philosophy and religion, vs. those who have not
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 05:22
|
|
|
the goon that wasted money and the goons that have not. HEEEEYO
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
Tired Moritz posted:the goons that have not. a contradiction in terms, by definition all goons have wasted 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 05:27
|
|
|
I’ve studied philosophy and by that I mean I smoke a lot of weed
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 05:50
|
|
|
So everyone has brought up good points and the only way I can think to understand them is watching the show over again from the beginning so I’m gonna do that. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 08:32
|
|
|
Lutha Mahtin posted:this show and thread is an excellent shibboleth for determining which goons have ever studied philosophy and religion, vs. those who have not This is what some people post like in this thread: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 08:59
|
|
|
Do they explain how Jason avoids dying in s3 when they go back to Earth? Because I imagine it's something like, Michael walks over and asks about their robbery plan and they slooooowly realize the big flaw. But then they still do it, just with airholes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 23:19
|
|
|
SardonicTyrant posted:Do they explain how Jason avoids dying in s3 when they go back to Earth? Because I imagine it's something like, Michael walks over and asks about their robbery plan and they slooooowly realize the big flaw. But then they still do it, just with airholes. Don't they show Micheal just opening the door to the safe up?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 23:22
|
|
|
Sorry, should have mentioned I haven't seen s3 yet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
SardonicTyrant posted:Sorry, should have mentioned I haven't seen s3 yet. Lol come on now!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 00:01
|
|
|
SardonicTyrant posted:Sorry, should have mentioned I haven't seen s3 yet. then... why...
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 04:53
|
|
|
now you're gonna tell me you watched season 2 before the first
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 06:14
|
|
|
Jeremy Bearimy, baby
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 06:56
|
|
|
(pointing to the dot) "that's where season five is!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 07:10
|
|
|
Tired Moritz posted:now you're gonna tell me you watched season 2 before the first This is a dig at me, isn't it. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 12:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 07:22 |
|
|
SardonicTyrant posted:Sorry, should have mentioned I haven't seen s3 yet. Maybe you should save all questions until the end of the ride. Or at least say where you are when you ask them if you care about spoilers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2019 13:31
|
|