This is about fictional theology. When heaven is terribly selective on a point system yet fragile and imperfect and sub-let to an apprenticeship system, why is there a Bad Place? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! http://www.ew.com/article/2016/09/16/good-place-point-system-afterlife-ted-danson-kristen-bell
The "bad place" dont exist... its just a scare tactic to force people into behavin a certan way.!!! The first show was kinda funy an i plan on watchin it agan... but it coud soon run out of gas wit the same sappy concept of "bad" people seein the light (so to speek) an then behavin corectly.!!! The pont system makes as little sinse as the Holey Bible "pont system"... meh.!!!
I don't watch broadcast TV, so I've never seen the show. (I've never even heard of it.) But shouldn't all the actions in one's life that have an ethical component be relevant? Isn't one of the complaints made about a certain kind of Christian that they think that they are saved because they have faith in Jesus, while remaining assholes in their daily lives? Shouldn't their behavior in those daily lives count? How would judgement's applying to an entire life in its entirety be hellish? I can see how it might seem that way to those to whom being good is perceived as an external imposition, like having police watching them at all times. That individual still desires to do bad things, but only refrains out of fear of getting into trouble, or not accruing enough goodness-points to make it into heaven, or something. There's still something problematic about that kind of motivation. The goal in most religious ethics isn't proper outward behavior, though that is obviously important. The issue that religious ethics addresses is where that behavior comes from, what's motivating it, the virtues that the moral actor is displaying. I'd guess that's what Paul and Luther's 'faith not works' idea means, and it's definitely what Buddhist ethics is all about. I don't know what "sublet to an apprenticeship system" means, but I can imagine that those who are admitted to heaven based on points, presumably meaning accruing enough good behavior and nothing that's too egregious, still might have problems with their motivation and their inner virtues. They may have done the right things, but not for the right reasons. Those people still might need additional training and inner work. Gaining entry into heaven, however paradisical it might be, might not be the final destination of the path that they have set out on.
1) Because none of the world's self-proclaimed experts on the nature of heaven were more than about 5% correct, 2) Because there was no communicated acknowledgement of the one person who managed to guess over 90% (while under the influence of drugs), 3) Because the awarding of points is arbitrary so when people make choices even between two good things, they do so in ignorance not just of future ramifications of the only world they have information of but of the capricious judgement system (see scratch elbow and root for New York Yankees), 4) Because there is a binary decision based on a threshold the exceedingly few people achieve, and 5) Because basically every artist, composer, etc and Florence Nightingale failed to measure up to the standard. The “architect” (and governor) of the show's little corner of heaven (called a neighborhood) was an apprentice architect for 200 years and is presently nervously in charge of his first solo project. If there exists access to higher or more experienced authorities, nothing has been let on yet. The main point is both the system and agents of the system exhibit fallibility and lack omniscience.
Never watched it, either. But from what I've read, there's no special commitment to ideas in Abrahamic mythology. The eclecticism of Michael Schur's generic spirituality for the show could have both the "Bad Place" and the "Good Place" being transitional stages in a process of an individual's further development. Or even outright pit-stops between reincarnations. Which is to say, the initial appearances of "what's going on" and whatever parameters the story might seem confined to could gradually evaporate or turn askew as the story unfolds over time. The "bad place" might be exposed as a scary facade, serving a bogeyman function; or it being revealed that there are degrees between the two opposite extremes after all. If Schur is truly committed to the show being a moral complexity ballgame (the hand-me down religious dogmas of the diverse residents are just impotent window-dressing), then the puzzle might be left to how could a "good place" slash "bad place" afterlife dichotomy fall out of ethics alone. But his underlying conception of a generic spirituality is surely sharing some responsibility as the origin for the environmental conditions that the show's moral quandaries and issues play-out in. Should the point system be more than a mere accessory of the overall set-up -- i.e., be pivotal to a confusion of how the system can make sense, and not be remedied by the initial appearances context... Then Schur may not have a scheme already worked out in detail. He and his staff could be making-up the details of the general concept as they go along, similar to what transpired in a good part of "Lost". Any potential lack of consistency thereby attributable to the sloppiness of that. In the old days of television, the viewers wouldn't even waste a hope in expectations of internal coherence and social worth in the escapism fantasy comedies of the '60s. So apparently our standards for programming have risen considerably since that era. How Will NBC's 'The Good Place' Tackle Religion?: Don’t use the R-word in discussing the show with its creator, and don’t ascribe even quasi-religious underpinnings to its premise. “Spiritual and ethical is how I thought of it,” Schur says. [...] viewers will see people from every continent and every tradition represented in the afterlife, which is divided into neighborhoods. [...] the pilot goes out of its way to demonstrate a United Nations of characters and belief systems.” [...] “When Eleanor is working hard to become better, she’s reading more philosophy than religion,” Schur says. [...] a comedy set in the afterlife but that doesn't make it a religious show. [...] “I realized it’s about versions of ethical behavior, not religious salvation," he says. [...] http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/good-place-religion-explained-mike-927402 Wikipedia: Stuck in a world where no one curses or gets drunk and everyone is always nice, Eleanor finds herself caught between staying in this afterlife or trying to find a way to return to her mundane life back on Earth, as her entry into "the good place" has caused disruptions since her arrival. Now Eleanor must hide her not-so-perfect mortal behavioral past from everyone so they won't send her to "the bad place".
Of course there's something problematic about external forces motivating unacceptable behaviors. However, this in no way invalidates the fact that there is a "secret"or difficult-to-access world (occasioned by logical insight and/ or evidenced by the 6th sense as opposed to the ordinary 5) called the spirit world. http://www.sciforums.com/threads/reality-as-god.141968/
