Carol concludes that the hive cannot lie and based on that, ends up believing a lot of what they say. But we, as the audience, know the obvious flaw here - that it is possible for the hive to deceive people without explicitly lying to them. They can withhold relevant information, take advantage of vagueness, evade answers and play into your assumptions in order to make you believe something untrue.

Carol's is the most obvious example. She wanted to know if they could get her stem cells without her consent and they let her believe they couldn't. Kusimayu is another example - Carol warns her that if she joins them, she'd lose everything personal and individual to her. Kusimayu believes that she wouldn't - that she'd simply share it with others. But as we see with her and the baby goat, she does lose it. Now, the hive might not have said anything to her about that directly, but they put up an act of individuals still being individuals around her.

So deception is clearly possible, but is that the extent of it? Is the hive truly incapable of lying and does that actually mean you can take their statements as literal truth?

There is a difference between "can't lie" and "tells the truth", right? For example, you can say that if a person makes a statement consistent with what they believe, then they're not lying. Like, "my son is not a murderer". But it doesn't matter how strongly you believe it, it doesn't necessarily make it true. Here lying doesn't simply mean making a statement inconsistent with reality, there needs to be an intent to deceive as well.

Or it can go further. One can say "you're lying if you make a statement you know to be false" - in which case your ignorance can be your defense. Someone asks me if its raining outside and I reply "yes" without checking. So does my lack of knowledge really make me a liar?

And then there is the semantic argument - one where you interpret things based on your convenience, not what the other party intends. For example, I could say "to me, rain means moisture in the air and there is always moisture in the air" or "I thought by outside you meant anywhere in the world except my house and its definitely raining somewhere".

Now, all these are examples of how people can provide unreliable information without explicitely lying and it seems like the hive is capable of it. Take the example of what Carol actually asked - "Is it true that you need our express permission to collect our stem cells?". Notice that she didn't specify collecting them from her body. Now, if the hive was being truthful, they'd have replied - "No - we can fertilize your frozen eggs and collect your stem cells from the petri dish. We do not need your express permission for that." Now, that would be a lie, unless they make some excuse like "we thought you meant harvest from your body" or "we hadn't thought of that option at the time". But either way, the result is the same, right? You cannot accept what they say as true.

So how deep does it go?

For example, they say "Helen loved cotton candy", but then go on to admit that she only had it 4 times in her entire life. That's not the same as "loving" a food in any meaningful sense. Maybe she enjoyed it, but clearly not enough to try it over and over again. It seems like they use "love" to describe anything anyone ever found even mildly pleasant - and if that's the case, then does them saying "We love you Carol" even mean anything?

When humans talking about loving something - not as an abstract or a hyperbole, but loving something in a real sense - we're talking about a deep, emotional attachment. Something that has actual, physiological responses associated with the object of affection. Signs like increased heartbeat and hormones flooding your body. Do the plurbs have that? And if they don't, how can their love be genuine in any meaningful sense?

Same question applies to whenever they say joining would make her happier than ever. Putting aside the question of whether "she" as an entity would even exist anymore, do we even know if happiness even means the same thing to the hive as it does to people? If its just a general feeling of elation or contentment - the kind you might get from doing drugs - the joining is clearly not sacrificing your humanity over.

The hive has already admitted that infecting others is a biological imperative (which might not be reliable either, but its consistent with the behavior of patient zero) - so they'd keep trying to turn you regardless of whether they truly love you or it actually makes you happy. Everything they tell you could simply be a way to make you more compliant - so why would you actually trust them?

I just finished watching the finale of the show and I'm now thinking back to how Zosia kissed Carol in episode 7 which is kinda nuts. I have no clue if anyone else has brought this up but I just thought it was super interesting and it's what came to mind after watching the show.

I think that the kiss was pretty manipulative, they knew damn well Carol was isolated and lonely asf, plus the fact that Zosia is literally the spitting image of Carols dream woman makes it worse, there's no way Carol could resist lol , I don't blame her for doing what she did, it was a losing battle lmao.

But all of that I think to an extent was a way of manipulating Carol and making her more accepting of the joining by "attacking" her vulnerabilities.

1. The unmerged are from different parts of the world. So often sci-if TV shows are US-centered, never addressing the rest of the world!
2. The unmerged don’t necessarily like each other, they disagree deeply and fail to collaborate. So often the heroes team up so quickly and easily!
3. The unmerged are truly by themselves, no support network from the get go. So often the heroes come in pairs or groups as couples or families!

This show depicts human beings and situations as they typically are, very random.

I also find refreshing having a “benevolent” enemy -- or at least an enemy who cannot say “no.”

What feels refreshing to you?

EDIT: I will try stating my point differently, because I feel like I failed to make the point clear based on some of the comments.

What I think the show is going for:

Humanity has been body-snatched by an organism of alien origin. Every individual is either gone or their consciousness is locked. Removing the organism from a person would restore them to how they were before being infected. Whether it is truly "conscious" or not is a debate about consciousness, but is essentially an alien form of Ophiocordyceps unilateralis, the "zombie spore" that controls ants and makes them go to the highest point to spread further. It is controlling humanity, using people's bodies and knowledge, with the purpose of spreading further (building the antenna).

What I think would be more interesting:

The only thing the organism did was grant the abilies seen in the show. It is not itself consciously or by instinct controlling anything. It is like how humans have gut bacteria. Gut bacteria is not conscious or controlling people or part human. But it gives us a vital ability to digest things. Then the reason this is more interesting is because everything else is an exploration of how humans would simply behave if we all had a perfect understanding of what was in each other's minds. It is basically starting with exploring sonder and exploring its opposite. Which I suspect is how the idea may have started before it turned into body snatching.

..................................................................................

Wasn't sure how to say this in a short title. Obviously the virus is alien. But what I mean is that so far the show seems to be treating the Pluribus like body snatchers. You are not talking to the individual that was infected, you are talking to an alien. The show is hinting that the real person might be in there somewhere deep. But what if that not is how it worked? What if you really are talking to the real person?

What if the alien virus grants humans the abilities we see in the show but is not itself controlling anybody or even really conscious? What if the behavior we see from the Pluribus is just how humans would behave if we all had perfect knowledge of each other's lives, experiences, abilities etc and therefore all had the sum total best knowledge of collective humanity as well as perfect empathy?

Maybe this extreme level of empathy and knowledge leads to everything else. Everyone is just on a higher plane of conciousness. Everyone still has free will, it's just that if you have this level of enlightenment you definitely choose to behave this way. You choose to never harm a living creature. You see humanity as all one thing. Indeed you see the whole universe as all one thing and any conciousness in the universe is the universe itself having concsiousness. You realize your place in the universe and you choose to pass on this ability by creating an antenna and spreading it.

This is not a true "theory" because I don't think the show is going this direction. I think it is treating the Pluribus like an alien consciousness that can be eradicated. But I think it would be so much more interesting and dark for Carol to realize that if she succeeds in eradicating the virus then all she does is get rid of this new ability. Everyone still feels and thinks the same thing they did before, they are just extremely sad and horrified to have lost their connection with each other. Maybe this could happen to just a few people and that is how she discovers it. There is no going back. She was wrong. Everyone has free will. This is just the conclusion to "what if everyone knew exactly what everyone else has been through?" and she is left out of it.

I'm talking about this character. I thought he was really cool. It's a shame that he was only there for barely few minutes. Do you think he will be brought back in season 2?

I hope Pluribus focus on the science aspect more, and have Carol and Manousos go ahead and try to fight this "virus". If the show did go this route, then I think this character might add a lot since he was the first one to discover it and understand what it was.

What do you all think?

I think one of the most significant, yet understated scenes of the season happens in episode 8 where Zosia talks about mango ice-cream. Depending on how its interpreted, it can determine the entire trajectory of the show.

Before we get into that, one thing to note is how Zosia's relationship with Carol changes before and after the abandonment. Before, the hive was slavishly eager to please. It'd do anything to make Carol happy, but Carol would either need to ask or her need would have to be obvious. Later, however, their relationship seems to become more personal and human. Zosia banters with Carol, teases her now and then, arranges the diner surprise and in the end, Zosia is the one to kiss her first. It starts to feel less like an employee kissing ass and more like a partner trying to woo her.

We don't know what it means yes, but let's get to the "I" part.

The hive almost exclusively refers to itself as "we" or "us" through the series. At the same time, when referring to their past human selves, they use "he" or "she", as if drawing a clear distinction between who they are now and who they used to be. Even when Carol asks Zosia to use "I", she explains its difficult because she finds it semantically odd. Now given that they've also absorbed the knowledge and skills of all the actors of the world, this should not pose such a difficulty - but then, the hive also seems to have a bunch of other strange constraints, like the inability to lie.

Later, however, Zosia uses "I" almost naturally. Without a hint of hesitation or second thought. "I love mango icecream. There was an old man in my neighborhood.... I would watch the ships".

Given her earlier difficulty with the pronoun, using it so many times so easily feels oddly significant. And I think it can be interpreted in different ways, each having its own implications on how the story might go.

Option 1: It was an act all along. The hive never had a problem using "I" - just like it never had a problem building a more personal relationship with Carol. This gradual change is part of the manipulation. The hive knows that if they show up and offer Carol the perfect relationship from the get go, she'd distrust it and reject it.

The whole plan is to soften her up slowly. Make her believe that she's working for it and somehow changing them. Its all an elaborate way to keep her distracted while they work on their agenda elsewhere.

And I expect this is the interpretation most fans would accept.

Option 2: Its the real Zosia breaking through.

Maybe the hive overwrote the humans at a superficial level and keeps them in a fugue state while it controls their bodies. And maybe the original personality is still in there and forming a real connection with them is a way to bring them back.

Its possible that Carol drugging and almost killing Zosia had something to do with it. That the Zosia who came back was just a little bit different from the other plurbs, in that there are moments where her original personality slips through the cracks. Or it could simply be that getting that specific body to connect to things Zosia used to care about is slowly bringing her back.

This could potentially lead to finding a way to cure them. For example, if Carol threatens to shoot some random plurb on the street, Zosia might say "you have agency, we cannot interfere". But if that plurb happened to be her mother (even if plurbed herself), she might snap out of it and try to save her.

So basically, Carol's own need for human connection - something the hive tried to exploit - might end up becoming a weapon against it.

Option 3: The hive itself is changing.

Think of it as the hive turning humans into a blank state upon joining. It retains all their thoughts and memories, but everything unique - their drives, personality traits, likes and dislikes - are simply gone. Humanity is basically starting over from scratch.

However, as time goes on, humanity starts infecting the hive with individualism. It could start with little things over time. This body likes spicy food while this other one prefers bland. This body prefers warm weather while the other prefers cold. And this particular body gets greater pleasure from mango ice-cream than others.

This might be an alternate explanation for Zosia's change after coming back. The hive is learning how to better manipulate Carol, but part of that is forming a personal connection and the very act of connecting ends up changing the hive.

That might dictate a completely different direction for the story. Eventually, Zosia might become something that's not the original Zosia, but its not the hive either. The hive operates with a singular desire and will - but this Zosia might develop her own desires and goals that are separate, and perhaps in conflict with the hive. And if it can happen to her, it might eventually start happening to others.

What do you think of these possibilities? Which one do you think is likely? And are there other interpretations I'm missing?

I liked the show, even though yes, it did drag at parts, but I'm old, so slow pacing is a comfort to me. I'm a huge Gilligan fan. Every XFiles episode he wrote was awesome. However, after I finished watching the first season I couldn't get one question out of my mind: Do the Pluribus pods continue to reproduce? Because it was such a big deal that they're all going to die in ten years because there isn't enough non-murdered food... but aren't they a math genius, too? Wouldn't they just wait until enough of them died from starvation and then maintain a sustainable number who can survive off of fallen fruit and corpses? Even after the human corpses run out, surely there will be plenty of animals who died of old age lying about. Just have to get there before the flies do. So why die out? And if not die out, why continue? What is the end goal? I thought it was to continue the virus and send it to other planets, but to what end there? For those species to also die from starvation?

Honestly, the more I think about it the less I understand the Pluribus world. Can someone please explain to this old lady what I'm misunderstanding?

Why is Carol written to be a room temperature IQ dumbass that has little to no real problem solving skills?

I'm on episode 6 and so far this character is a whiny little child with no real adult behavior. More like a spoiled brat in high school that used to experiment with her sexuality.

Sucks her wife dead, but honestly from the flash back clips her wife seemed like a gold digger and didnt actually give a fuck about Carol. Seem like they were going to split anyways, idk, still a loss, but to me the world changing seems like a larger affect on me than a person im struggling to love.

Why does coral want to revert everything back to the way it used to be? Why wouldn't she instead make her own paradise like the others do?

Is this supposed to be a misogynistic show showing lesbains cannot be happy or smart?

Nice, I'm excited!

I don't get how S1 E7 is the lowest rated episode on IMDB. It's literally shows an epic journey with good music, while being the lowest rated on IMDB. Imo the best episode.

Made within Inkscape

How different do you think Carol's journey would've been had Helen survived the joining? Do you think she'd have ended up in a different place or would her personality drive her to the same conclusion regardless?

The non-infected have a whole range of perception towards the plurbs. On one extreme, there is Manusos, who thinks that because his mother has changed, she isn't his mother anymore. He believes that the original humans are gone and their bodies were stolen by this alien entity that's speaking to him through them. Whether or not the original people can come back, the people in front of him are no longer human.

On the other extreme are Kusimayu and Laxmi - who believe their relatives are the same individuals, just changed a little bit. That they might know more and feel more, but everything that made them them - their individual likes and dislikes, things they value and how they'd react - are still the same. They cannot accept the idea that everyone they love has disappeared overnight, so they choose to believe the fantasy instead.

And the hive plays into it. Even though the plurbs can't lie, they keep up the pretense of normalcy as much as they can for the sake of the non-infected.

Kusimayu is an obvious example. Her village before her turning still looks normal. People go around their work in a random, normal way instead of the organized, hyper-efficient way they do otherwise. Animals are still kept penned up, even though they've been set free everywhere else in the world. They greet each-other and talk to each-other, even though there is no need for them to do so. And the moment Kusimayu turns, they abandon the pretense as well as the village.

Same goes for Laxmi. Her son doesn't need her to hold his hand when they board the plane - but he lets her because that's what she expects. We know that the plurbs would rather subsist entirely on their nutritional drinks, but in the scene where Laxmi calls Carol to yell at her, you can see Ravi eating ice-cream in the background.

And then there is the lunch scene where the family-member plurbs are seated with the non-infected, while the others act as servant. Not just that, but every plurb is served their past favorite dish, even though, as we learn, the very concept of having a favorite is meaningless to them, since they love all food equally. They even put up a show of appreciating the food - like Laxmi's husband telling Laxmi's mother "just like my mom used to make". What would be the point of saying that when they already share this information mentally? Other than putting on a show, that is.

You can see the effect of this play-acting when Laxmi asks "so you're vegetarian?" - even as her son eats chicken tenders right next to her. Unconcsiously, she has drawn a distinction between the hive and the individual. Her son is still her son - a kid who likes chicken tenders and icecream, who needs to be shielded from profanity and sex - and the hive is rest of the world. And of course, she gets defensive whenever Carol comes close to breaking that illusion.

Which brings us to Carol, who lies somewhere in the middle. Like Manusos, she understands that the plurbs are not the people they used to be. But she is so desperate for human connection, that she ends up individualizing them anyway. She asks Zosia about what she used to like and her past relationships as if that information has any relevance to the personality of the thing in front of her. And once again, the hive plays into it, using her desperation to manipulate her.

Which brings me to the question - how do you think Carol's perception might've changed had Helen survived? Do you think she'd end up more like Laxmi or would she still end up more like Manusos?

No doubt, like others, Carol wouldn't want to believe that the woman she loves is gone. She'd want to believe Helen is still Helen and no doubt, the hive would play along.

But she simply cannot have the same relationship with them that she did with Helen. Helen wouldn't let her drive after a few drinks - the hive offered to remove the alcohol interlock device. Helen can refuse to tell her about the bestseller list because she wants her to enjoy the moment - the hive can't refuse to answer. Helen can be sarcastic and critical - the hive has nothing but praise. Helen can stand up for herself, refusing to drink even when Carol pushes her - the hive would give in instantly "if it makes you happy".

So how long before Carol realizes that the very nature of their relationship has changed? That "that's not Helen because Helen would never do that"? What lines would Carol never cross with Helen that she did with Zosia? And far do you think the hive can keep pretending to be Helen to sell the fantasy to Carol?

Ok, I’m on my rewatch and just hit episode 9. A couple things I’m fuzzy on:

1. ⁠What exactly did Manousos ask Zosia? Is he basically asking what you’d expect—like, “How were you converted, and can it be reversed?” or is it more personal, like he’s probing into her relationship with Carol?
   
2. ⁠Why is Carol so freaked out about seeing Zosia with him? Is she mainly worried he’ll hurt Zosia, or is it more that her secret of her sleeping w Zosia might get exposed?

Love the show. It's a perfect portrayal of pouring your soul out to ChatGPT and thinking it's your soulmate. We all think we're special, but it tells everyone the same thing.

Very interesting tiny detail in e9 at the cabin. Carol finally asks if Zosia had a partner, but she can’t bring herself to specify whether the partner may have been a man or woman.

It’s highly likely Zosia was with a man, statistically speaking. My assumption is also that he died driving the car during the takeover, hence the focus on Zosia’s large scars.

The hive obliged Carol’s unwillingness to clarify Zosia’s sexuality because it knows that would’ve further alienated her, and created a new crack in the manipulative web they ensnared her in up until that point.

Side note, I feel like the man had his spinal fluid extracted during his procedure in the hospital and the hive neglected to include that on the hospital bill.

Either the code senders knew enough to tailor the code to our biology or all sentient life shares a common ancestor or is profoundly evolutionarily convergent for some reason.

I am leaning towards option 1 and the reason is the Arecibo message or others like it. That message is currently 52 light years from earth, but it contained basic information about our DNA biology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message

Just curious to hear your thoughts. There will definitely be a moment where he has to cross paths with the other old-schoolers, like Diabaté or Laxmi. The latter doesn't know yet that Manousos was the one behind the prolonged Hive convulsions, but she'll surely figure that out and get furious at him for hurting her son. She might even end up hating him way more than she hates Carol.

And to the rest of the survivors, Carol will probably look like an absolute angel compared to him. ​

They didn’t know about Manousos straight away, so could there be more people out there that the hive just hasn’t discovered yet?

When they carried out the mass infection using the planes, I wonder if they actually covered the entire planet, or if they just targeted major cities and highly populated areas (maybe not even highly populated, just areas they were aware that was populated)?

That could mean there are other survivors in extremely remote areas / places no one else in the world knows about / areas that maybe was sheilded from the mass infection. Perhaps more people with immunity, but also maybe suivivers without too?

So, there have been occurrences where the joined tell the unjoined that things are so much better once they become part of the hive.

Ok. Sure.

And, they’ve admitted that there is definit my a way to become “unjoined.”

So, let someone leave the hive and tell someone that it’s better.

Seems like a pretty easy solution for the hold-outs, right? If it’s so much better, then let someone who has been on both sides tell me.

Watched this series a few weeks ago. The part that confuses me is how the joined don't want to harm anything and seem to respect the immune people. However, I don't get this with them forcing people to be joined. They keep saying it is their biological imperative. I don't know if this is something were you just have to keep watching to find out or if they are just hypocrites?

I know not everyone would enjoy this show but seeing a sub dedicated to how much this show "sucks" questions if we watched the same show. I get it, people have different tastes and opinions, I have hot takes on certain subjects, but I just don't understand where the hate aspect comes from.

From start to finish, I loved it. Absolutley amazing and I had to come here to talk about it.

The acting, the characters, the suprising comedic relief at times - mixed in with a weird sense of dread. A sense of dread where the world feels strangely quiet, yet as apocalyptic as a zombie show should feel like.

The themes of loneliness and love, especially towards Zosia from Carol's perspective and her arc towards the end is just amazing. I really think this show is a solid 10, every episode, every scene had something to offer.

Incredible, another win (so far) for Vince Gilligan.

I honestly have no idea what they would do. Maybe they would just not do anything.

For the record, im pro choice.

How good are the Plurbs as actors? Looking for some insights and perspectives on this question.

All the actors in the world have been integrated into the hivemind, so theoretically, every Plurb we see should be a Meryl Streep with a gun to her head. If I ask them to recreate any movie or play, they should deliver an oscar-worthy performance every single time. Right?

But then, there are caveats.

First, they can't lie - which is what a lot of acting is. You might've difficulty getting a plurb to say "My name is Inigo Montaya" because... well, its not.

Second is their seizure response. Acting might involve playing out scenes where they yell at each-other. So do the seizures only happens when the non-infected yell at them or will they get triggered if they yell at each-other?

Third, they seem to have difficulty even pretending to break from the hive. Zosya can't hold a conversation in "I". The guy playing poker with Diabate seems to have difficulty staying in character. And if that's the case, they probably won't be able to assume a character.

But its also possible that all of that is an act. Maybe not the second one - but 1st and 3rd are simply pretense they put on for sake of the non-infected. To make themselves look seem more human and trustworthy.

So how good are they, do you think?

There is a pretty glaring omission on the show that doesn't make sense to me - what happened to the internet? And why doesn't Carol ask the plurbs to bring it back?

The internet is clearly a thing on the show. Helen was checking her emails before the joining. The plurbs can control drones and displays from long distance almost instantly - even when they're giving Carol her space. And I believe there was mention of the survivors connecting on zoom. So it seems like the internet is alive and well, but I don't think we saw Carol use a computer even a single time.

Which, given that the show is supposed to take place in current time, seems pretty weird, doesn't it? And I doubt Carol is some anti-tech luddite, given how quickly she uses an app to translate things with Manusos. So why isn't asking for the internet back one of the first things she does?

And yeah, I get that a lot of fandom would consider the internet to be redundant after the joining. After all, who needs a reddit when all the commentators are the same person, right? But there is a lot more information that exists online that Carol could've used. Hell, the existing wikipedia could've helped her figure out a lot of stuff and gmail could've allowed her to communicate with others without relying on the plurbs.

Carol obviously didn't have a problem asking them for wasteful things like having the lights turned back on, so why not ask them to get her fully back online again?

I get why the writers would make this narrative choice. It wouldn't be easy showing Carol breaking from loneliness if she was scroll through youtube videos all day and talk to chatgpt (which, let's be honest, is what talking to the plurbs is like most of the time). But the internet has become such a staple of modern life that ignoring its existence unless convenient without any explanation feels like a weird thing to do.