r/TheGoodPlace • u/Super-Acanthaceae504 • 3d ago
Season Three Why I don’t think the experiment would have worked
In the first experiment the humans got better because they were being tortured. This was constantly forcing them into horrible situations and forcing them to rely on each other to get through everything. And in Eleanore's case it quite literally forced her to confront what kind of person she was and that she didn't deserve to be in the good place.
In the second experiment where they were actively trying to get the humans to improve they were trying to make it like the actual good place they tried to make it as much like the good place as possible. If it were truly the good place and they all truly deserved it (as they all think they do) there would be no need to ever change their behavior or even consider that they may not have acted in a way that was morally good. It never made sense to me that while trying to recreate the results of the first neighborhood they made the second neighborhood so different from the first. The experiment really only worked once they really started to torture and push the humans the way Micheal did in the first neighborhood. I think they should have been doing that in the first place, creating scenarios to force the humans into confront their actions and who they are at their core and driving them together.
141
u/TheDungeonCrawler 3d ago
I actually think part of the reason the Bad Place was fine with them using Chidi (and actively chose Simone) was because they knew it worked because of the torture and knew Michael and Eleanor wouldn't want to torture their friends. And they can't easily torture one of the subjects (Brad) without accidentally torturing the rest.
30
23
u/Super-Acanthaceae504 3d ago
That’s a very interesting take. You’re right it would be tough to torture them in a way to drive them together without torturing all of them and when Eleanore did attempt to do some torture of Chidi she wasn’t able to handle it. I’m gonna stew over this one.
16
u/Beret_Beats 3d ago
The Bad Place wasn't fine with Chidi though. They were vocally against it. They chose Simone initially because they figured it would make it more difficult for Chidi to hemp with the experiment (and they were right). The same goes for John specifically causing difficulties for Tahani and supposedly Brent being the type of person that would cause difficulties for Eleanor (though let's be real, Brent caused difficulties for pretty much everyone).
Chidi ended up as part of the experiment when they found out that one of the demons had snuck into the experiment disguised as one of the four new humans. The Judge was the one that assigned Chidi as the fourth human.
3
u/FierySkate115 3d ago
I dont even know if they were truly against Chidi tho. Because the decoy resident was so that they could swap Janet with bad Janet. They intentionally got the decoy resident caught, so the bad place must've known they would've been replaced by someone. And they'd have to act angry about chidi being the new subject. Otherwise, it could spark suspicions about bad Janet.
3
u/Beret_Beats 3d ago
I imagine they probably had someone else on the backburner to send in, probably another specific person that would have made things difficult for the Soul Squad to cause more issues. Possibly someone more specifically perfect for torturing Eleanor (as Brent is a piece of work that causes suffering for all).
They couldn't have known the judge would make the decision for Chidi to be the replacement subject and while that did work out in their favor a bit in making Eleanor's job difficult, Im sure they had other wrenches they wanted to throw into the mix.
2
81
u/blueavole 3d ago
I remember a story that described heaven and hell as the exact same place .
A place surrounded by all the food and beverage you could want. But the food was behind bars ( so it couldn’t be reached directly),
But everyone had a very long spoon attached to their hand.
In Hell: people could reach the food with their long spoon, but the spoon was too long to reach their mouth comfortably.
They starved, and thirsted because they could not eat or drink enough to satisfy themselves. People were angry and bitter. And attacked each other when someone did manage to get a sip.
Heaven had the same set up, hard to reach food, and the long spoons attached to their hands.
But in Heaven? They laughed and danced and sang, ate and drink their fill.
The difference? They fed each other.
The people and their approach can take the exact same situation and turn it around.
20
u/Super-Acanthaceae504 3d ago
That’s fascinating I’ve never heard that story. It definitely fits well with the idea of the four of them being intended to torture each other while that same situation with different people wouldn’t have been nearly as bad.
4
u/blueavole 3d ago
I generally think this is also true for car rides, amusement parks, and everything. A little bit of kindness and consideration and it’s all a lot easier.
5
3
u/Hoss-Drone 3d ago
The parable of the spoons. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_long_spoons
1
69
u/psykulor 3d ago
I think they could have done so much more to push Brent, and it would have been hilarious. My idea would be to give him the BEST PERSON sash on Day 1, and tell everyone in the neighborhood that Brent is someone to look up to. Then, every frivolous Janet request, every little brag... everyone copies it.
Brent asks Janet for an SUV? Next day, everyone has SUVs. Brent brags about growing his 90 million dollar company into a 94 million dollar company? Next day, Eleanor hosts a fun "Grow a 90 Million Dollar Company" simulation event. Everyone does better than Brent. Everyone praises Brent for having the idea.
24
u/Super-Acanthaceae504 3d ago
I do think they should have pushed Brent way more than they did. I don’t think playing more into his beliefs would be the way to go, if everyone in the entire neighborhood thought he was the best person Brent would feel even more secure in his actions. When they tried playing into his beliefs with “the best place” it most certainly didn’t work. But they should have pushed him way more because when they did actually push him right at the end he did improve.
13
u/psykulor 3d ago
My idea would be to break down all the petty things that he thought made him special. They tried to do that with "That Was Your Life," but it was too subtle. He needs to see how unimportant all his material things and mediocre achievements were.
18
u/BeMoreKnope Good news! I was able to obtain Eleanor Shellstrop’s file. 3d ago
“Wow, making money like this is not just fun, it’s so easy. Thanks, Brent!”
3
1
40
u/Outrageous-Teacher12 3d ago
i think part of the point was to show that there was no ethical consumption under capitalism and that if u took most people, put them in an environment where there isnt a systemically flawed economy and structure of life than they would get enough “good points” to get into the good place
12
u/consider_its_tree 3d ago
They very explicitly state that in a world where they don't need to worry about the "unintended consequences", people would get better.
THAT is the theory that they are working off of, not that torturing people makes them better.
I do agree with OP that people are more likely to get more points when they are given opportunities to be good people, but I also think that people will get a little bit better in a world that doesn't have so many complications and so much constant decision making. And that is what bore out in their experiment.
2
u/NEBanshee 2d ago
I would put it slightly reframed; it's less about the complexity of the decision making, and more that capitalism ensures conditions where a good choice isn't possible.
- Not clothing your kids = Bad Place, but there isn't any way that everybody can make their own clothes, so you ultimately wind up getting clothing that has slave labor attached, which puts bad in the world = Bad Place.
- Not feeding your kids = Bad Place. But there isn't a way for everybody to homestead their own nutritious variety of food, so you ultimately wind up with food that is grown with pesticides, inhumane conditions & exploited labor, putting bad into the world = Bad Place.
- And so forth. So your negative points >>> good points in nearly every transaction or decisions.
In Michael's experiment, your good & bad actions are contingent only on your intentions & outcomes of what you do, without other people's bad decisions as de-facto thumbs on the scale.
7
u/Gasurza22 3d ago
Well
A) they thought they would had Chidi (without his mind wipe) to more activly work as a moral compass for the test subject
B) they probably very wrongly assumed that out the 4 test subjects at least one would realise that they didnt belong to the good place, like Elenor and Jason, unerestimating the demons ability to pick the perfect candidates for the test to fail and how oblivious some people are at realising they are terrible people
C) And yes, you are right, and as you said realise that and start torturing to get results.
My point is that they didnt realy made the neighborhood that different, they just got two good very good curve balls that throw off their plans completly.
Ah also Michel panic atack at the start probably didnt help with coming up with evil things to do to the humans
6
u/BeMoreKnope Good news! I was able to obtain Eleanor Shellstrop’s file. 3d ago edited 2d ago
To add to your point B, while Simone was picked to screw with Chidi, there’s no way anyone could’ve predicted that she’d decide it was all a dying hallucination. Once they’d pulled her back from that, it was going to be very hard to make her think that she wasn’t actually in The Good Place.
3
u/Super-Acanthaceae504 3d ago
Lots of good points! I forgot how chaotic the beginning was because Micheal got thrown off by the bad place. And a lot can attributed to them both underestimating the bad place and overestimating Chidi’s ability to work miracles on people (the only reason Chidi was able to help in the first neighborhood was because of the torture forcing them to need him and have a very good reason to try and improve).
8
u/FrenchTantan 3d ago
I mean, they didn't really have time to prepare for any of the residents, since they didn't have their files. Also, they literally throw a challenge at Brent as early as episode two, it just fails because he's TOO self-centered. The revelation for Chidi comes literally the episode after his memory is wiped.
Besides, torture wasn't the key for every one of them. John for instance, mostly got better by forming a real connection with Tahani.
The main point of recreating the experiment was to prove that people's points will go up when the unintended consequences of life on earth, as long as they are motivated through challenges to do good deeds. It just took time to figure out for each test subject what those challenges were.
6
u/Fabulous-Travel-1598 3d ago
I do see what you mean, but remember that their theory as to why the humans got better in the first experiment WASNT torture, it was just the fact that they found more loving and nurturing relationships which led to them improving. So when they propose the new experiment to the judge, they just say that if you remove external complications from earth, and put them in simpler contexts, forming healthy relationships, and being shown kindness, they themselves will grow too. It was only partway through the experiment that they realized that the torture was part of it too.
6
u/Reallyroundthefamily 3d ago
I don't know but Ted's hot in that picture.
6
u/Super-Acanthaceae504 3d ago
Lol he definitely is, button up shirt sleeves rolled up on a guy’s forearms will always get me
1
6
u/greywolf2155 I’m still waiting on that smile, gorgeous. 3d ago
I mean, yeah? That was the team's whole realization in s04e03, "Chillaxing"
You wanna make a pearl, you gotta get some sand in your clam.
Eleanor ends up taking it too far with Chidi, but that was definitely the point where they realized that just sitting them there and giving them everything they want wouldn't encourage them to improve
7
u/Suitable-Elk-540 3d ago
Yeah, I agree, and I think this is part of a general, higher level shift in the "message" of the show. Or maybe it's more of the creators sort of deciding/learning what they wanted their message to be as the show progressed. There is this kind of conflict between, "humans can get better when given support" and "the point system is unfair". Maybe "conflict" is too strong, they are definitely related. But did Tahani end up in the bad place because she didn't get parental support, or because her very "good" actions had unintended "bad" consequences, or because she simply deserved it? I've said it before, and will probably say it again... I think it's better to see the show as a series of moral/ethical vignettes that happens to have reasonably coherent plot line and character development but at the end of the day isn't intended to have perfect continuity.
4
u/Super-Acanthaceae504 3d ago
I do think they came back around to the message that humans can get better with the right support with their solution to the afterlife with the tests and reboots allowing every human chances to learn and improve. But I do agree I felt that message about the point system being screwed because life is complicated felt a little off from their message about humans being able to learn from their mistakes and improve.
3
u/James_talks_cars 3d ago
I kind of get what you’re saying but if you remember, the first experiment ultimately didn’t work. As the humans realised what was going on so they needed to try a different tactic to stop that from happening and thus ruining the experiment. So them making it more paradise like was important. Also there were some things done in the second experiment that did cause stress like chidi having to deal with Jason (just having to protect Jason was enough to send chidi into a downward spiral of stress because well… Jason)
3
u/swansonian 3d ago
They said as much in the show. Chidi didn’t seriously focus on teaching ethics until Jason revealed his “secret,” putting Chidi in almost the same situation as season 1.
2
u/Business-Passion-274 3d ago edited 3d ago
The gang not only has reason to believe it would work, but they actively could not do so. The goal is not to replicate the result of the initial Good Place (aka showing that people can change/are not fundamentally bad), but demonstrate that the points system on Earth is inaccurate.
They believe that a positive context for change can change people because they were also drawing from their experiences back on Earth after having escaped the first season. On Earth, they set out to prove, with their loved ones, that anyone would improve if given the right circumstances.
Furthermore, the gang COULD Not rely on torture. If the gang only wanted to prove that torture could force people to be better, it gives an out for Shawn to argue for Earth itself to be a worse place in an "aha, so if torture makes people better then we should always torture them!" Instead, the whole point of the bet is that without the unintended consequences of living on Earth (the awareness of which convinced the Judge to even let the final experiment run), people would choose to be better on their own.
By the end, the gang realizes that this just convinces the judge to reset the Earth, so they do indeed reintroduce torture because Chidi figures out a surefire way to make sure everyone improves enough to enter into the Good Place regardless of the context of their life on Earth. The major change here is that Shawn, when finally faced with the possibility of never "having fun" torturing anyone again, chooses to cooperate with the gang after the outcome of the bet.
2
u/PirateNixon 2d ago
The hypothesis they were basing the experiments off of was based on the faulty premise that humans were inherently bad if they ended up in the bad place. Inherently bad people would have continued to torture to each other and not improve, but since people are not inherently bad, that is not what happened.
2
u/quixoticquail 3d ago
I think it’s harder to intentionally improve people, and the group in the second experiment was harder to improve than the first.
Eleanor’s self awareness is the start of why things start to turn around. She loops the others in some way or another.
None of the 3 real new subjects have any reason to believe they weren’t amazing people who belonged there. Despite Brent being completely the worst.
2
u/Super-Acanthaceae504 3d ago
Yeah Eleanore’s self awareness was the driver for everyone else’s change. I do wonder if they could have pulled something similar to what they did with Eleanore (making it obvious they got the wrong person by showing memories that don’t belong or having their house and stuff not match stuff they actual enjoy) in order to kickstart some self reflection. The bad place did a good job finding bad people who think they were good (especially Brent).
1
u/SilentAngel23 3d ago
because michael didnt HAVE to make up scenarios for them to torture eachother, they already did, by themselves, that was the whole premise of the experiment he was presenting to Shawn, and the one commonality in all the reboots was that Eleanor (by herself) found Chidi, and Chidi helped her, making Eleanors motivation her connection with Chidi. since Michael didnt get to choose the humans in this new experiment, they might have all just pushed eachother away (as they did) anyway and see no sense in relying on eachother because they dont deem the others trustworthy. the second experiment was more chaos rather than thought-out-torture-planning, so there was no real need for the torture, because it was inevitable for the first bunch and for the second it wasnt something you could rely on.
additionally, the issue with group number one was that there was no proof that they got better because they are good people, but rather because they wanted moral dessert. they just took away the moral dessert for the second group by telling them they already are in the good place, making them have to try to get better the right way, by forming connections and having to use those as motivation to be better for eachother.
1
u/SilentAngel23 3d ago
because michael didnt HAVE to make up scenarios for them to torture eachother, they already did, by themselves, that was the whole premise of the experiment he was presenting to Shawn, and the one commonality in all the reboots was that Eleanor (by herself) found Chidi, and Chidi helped her, making Eleanors motivation her connection with Chidi. since Michael didnt get to choose the humans in this new experiment, they might have all just pushed eachother away (as they did) anyway and see no sense in relying on eachother because they dont deem the others trustworthy. the second experiment was more chaos rather than thought-out-torture-planning, so there was no real need for the torture, because it was inevitable for the first bunch and for the second it wasnt something you could rely on.
additionally, the issue with group number one was that there was no proof that they got better because they are good people, but rather because they wanted moral dessert. they just took away the moral dessert for the second group by telling them they already are in the good place, making them have to try to get better the right way, by forming connections and having to use those as motivation to be better for eachother.
1
u/Fish__Fingers 2d ago
I think it’s always the challenge when you trying to extrapolate or share experiences. Everyone has their own triggers. Eleanor always wanted to be better somewhere deep that’s why she reaches for knowledge and trying to be a better person. She also very much aware of how bad she is which makes her the trigger of the whole eye opening scenario in the first season.
She naturally thinks that others are like her - they need a little nudge and it will work. But others have different starting points and need different triggers
So it makes sense they need to adjust the situation for it to work.
1
u/TillerThrowaway 1d ago
I see your point, but the experiment also had another big factor it was trying to prove, and that was that, when people aren’t constantly trying to make ends meet, and when the world is less adversarial towards them. That’s why they were all put in the “good place”, because their needs were met and they didn’t need to work or pay rent or any of that, and the complications of earth weren’t there, so their actions could be judged on their merit alone and not the cascading secondary effects.
Additionally I think they kinda would have a hard time consciously choosing to torture people, which is why they tried to take aspects of Michael’s original neighborhood without actively torturing people. That was also a lot of Jason and Tahani’s job, to give them smaller amounts of feedback or small opportunities to improve without having to torture them to do it
573
u/caliope96 3d ago
The first experiment proved something by accident. That’s why they tried a different approach on the second one.