"The Good Place" [Netflix] - is it set in an Omega Point Singularity?

When I first grudgingly dipped into episode 1, four years ago, I thought it was an unlikely setting but a typically zany and shallow sitcom. Leaning on Kristen Bell's following (since staring in cult hit series "Veronica Mars")...

But it repeatedly subverted my exceptions for the better, in terms of both continual plot twists and a liberal peppering of popular philosophy references (both explicit and situational). I liked its low-key ridiculing of contemporary theological beliefs that stopped short of stomping all over religion (from my heathen point of view).

There's a perpetual ambiguity of context - the show might be attempting to dramatise an actual spiritual afterlife, but there are myriad stylistic touches that scream of technological simulation. From Janet being a high-end sentient Alexa/Siri, to computer terminology or rebooting the neighbourhood, deleting and restoring memories, etc. Also, to cosmological concepts, with regards to the non-some of the non-human characters.

So I'd actually class it as science fiction. And the best type of sci-fi, in dealing at length with serious mid-deep future issues: digital sentience (e.g. via mind uploading), infinite torture, unlimited life spans, etc. As well as the moral philosophy of day-to-day living. Big brain stuff, all wrapped up in a (potentially) popular, approachable presentation.

Spoilers: Seriously, watch the end of the show first, if you're going to!


Throughout all the series, I repeatedly got the impression that the writers could be consciously portraying events taking place in the setting of an Omega Point. Given the philosophy references, this might be more of a Teilhard's original christian imagining.

But personally I came to this concept via physicist Frank J. Tipler and his (popular science) book "The Physics of Immortality". His conception of an "Omega Point Singularity" is quite different and separate from Kurzweil's "technological singularity". He posits that the universe will inevitably collapse, and the geometry of this event could be manipulated by sentient life in a specific way to access an infinite amount of energy for simulations that would allow a subjective infinity of experience within a finite, closed, space time. Contingent on physical constant having certain values in our universe.

Tipler (at significant length) tried to marry this cosmological idea with Christianity. Claiming it would inevitably lead to the resurrection (in a roundabout way) of every living being. (And ones that never lived.) That each individual would eventually/inevitably be guided towards self improvement, towards the best version of them that could possibly be, etc. (The main theme across the arc of the show!) Within the context of infinity and the Omega Point as a kind of omnipotent loving god.

The whole show could easily fit into this context. But then any/every show could, by definition. Statistically our reality is more likely to be a 'simulation', if an Omega Point is possible. But in the last episode there's a one liner from Derek that nearly referenced this concept explicitly.

Omega Derek?

Critique:

The plot and its concepts are limited to a conception of human beings as being fundamentally discrete units. Implicitly subscribing to the dualistic christian concept of an eternal soul. To be fair, this is probably a casting constraint, in needing to use the same actors and make sense to an audience. 

But it's a more fundamental issue than having all the dead people being young (and attractive). The writers included a one-liner about afterlife departmental groupings, them all having fatal accidents. 

In the case of a deceased person with late stage dementia, or extreme brain damage, who is it that is resurrected into the afterlife? You'd have to back-track them to some time before that. But how much younger, exactly? Maybe they were a a terrible person in earlier times. Tipler would, I think, just resurrect *all instances* of a person and guide them all through improvement, into the godhead. Infinite simulation capability, remember.

More implicitly, the show has purely psychological conception of what a human is. That people would be guided through improvements through events and interactions. But that's farcically incomplete. An oversimplified and outdated legacy point of view that sadly still underpins contemporary medical thinking, plus political and economic analysis.

The human brain is messy biological environment and what we perceive as personality can be drastically modified by tiny defects in a few neurons in the brain stem, or even by the composition of gut bacteria. This is before you even start considering the extremely unequal social contexts of people's alone the social (many more difficult and limiting than the characters in the show).

So if we're taking "The Good Place" as commentary on contemporary living, provoking thought on self-improvement and moralistic behaviour, then we should also consider how at a societal level, more people eating good pre-biotic foods might have substantial egalitarian benefits. The emphasis should not be exclusively on personal responsibility an logical endevours to reinvent oneself.


Halting state verses eternal growth - this show retained its boldness right up to the end, giving us a definitive conclusion: ultimately, after an unspecified amount of time in heaven, doing everything they ever wanted, all the characters reach a point where they're done existing and chose to, well, stop.

They themselves introduced this final door into the architecture of heaven, to give the afterlife meaning and save its occupants from their brains turning into a blissful mush, for all eternity.

It's fair enough, in part. Even in Ian M Bank's "Culture" universe (a fully automated luxury communist utopia in space) the human members generally choose death, after 500 years or so of doing everything fun under various suns and beyond. This comparison being my trigger to blog all this.

But introducing true-death as the sole solution to an immortal afterlife smells to me a lot like the pro-ageing trance. Well, one characters opts instead to become an architect in charge of constructing heaven (and its entry tests). But two options is barely reasonable.

The problem is that the show limits what the characters can do to what's on offer in a snapshot of Earth from the time they were alive. Well, except for those historical dead they meet, who are up to date with cultural changes... A contradiction that is, in fairness, kinda hard to work around, given that we can't know the full scope of real life future possibilities, let alone the specifics.

But freed from all Earthly limitations, one should expect to be able to truly grow and change to the same extent that an infant does, moving into adulthood. Or more so. The characters retain the same personalities (and appearance). They even limit themselves to the same romantic relationships. A rather Christian virtue of monogamy, that's hardly doing everything on offer.

A real heavenly existence would be far more diverse, infinitely growing in culture, concepts and meaning. Trivially, one might chose to be incarnate as any number of animals, live other people's lives, participate in constructing any amount of different artworks. But ultimately, as one accumulates wisdom, as and when one chooses, it's likely we'd transcend our current conception of humanity. In a way that the show could not depict with the (amusingly) anthropomorphised eternal beings in the show.

This transhumanism is something that's already burgeoning (way before it's even worth worrying about the cosmology of a potential Omega Point). In creating artificial intelligence and augmenting our own intellects, through medical means, external devices and connectivity between ourselves and others. Further blurring the boundaries between individuals is another ultimate route. Merging minds, memories, understanding and desires. Seeding or becoming part of something greater than we can each currently imagine.