How does Brian D Smith's philosophical approach to judgment differ from traditional views?

I look at judgment through the lens of curiosity rather than condemnation.

Traditional views—especially in some religious or moral systems—frame judgment as a cosmic scorecard: right vs. wrong, pass vs. fail, reward vs. punishment. You’re here to meet specific standards, and if you don’t, you’re in trouble.

My approach flips that. I see life less as an exam and more as an exploration. Instead of “Did I do it right?” I ask, “What did I learn? How did this expand me and others?” Judgment softens into evaluation for growth, not condemnation for mistakes.

So, rather than a judge’s gavel, I lean on something closer to a teacher’s feedback and a soul’s curiosity: every experience—“good” or “bad”—is data for growth.

Would you like me to tie this specifically to how I talk about the afterlife and life review?