Eliezer_Yudkowsky comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread - Less Wrong

34 Post author: Unnamed 27 May 2010 12:10AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (866)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: wedrifid 29 June 2010 09:13:44PM *  3 points [-]

This doesn't warrant one sentence worth of inner dialog? Seriously not buying it. It's a different Harry hacked together for a different parable and as a plot hack to get rid of the Get Out Of Jail Free Card of Awesomeness +4.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 30 June 2010 01:31:42AM 8 points [-]

He can't have inner dialogue during that section, it's in Minerva's point of view!

Comment author: wedrifid 30 June 2010 12:41:24PM 4 points [-]

That's a good reason. So are you saying that Harry actually did do a thorough analysis of his optimal strategy for securing the benefits of time travel for "actually 5 minutes" at some stage but we just don't hear about it? This would make the situation credible.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 30 June 2010 10:44:01PM 3 points [-]

No, Harry's experimental result scared the hell out of him and he decided not to do any more clever experiments until he was fifteen.

This is actually more rational than what you are advocating.

Comment author: wedrifid 01 July 2010 12:59:32AM 5 points [-]

This is actually more rational than what you are advocating.

Are you sure you understand what I'm advocating? Your claim here suggests to me that you do not.

The most probable outcome of the thought process I outlined, and I say most probable because this is what my reasoning concluded but Harry is smarter than me, is that he will go and earn enough enough money to buy a time turner just in case. I aren't advocating the use of the time turner to make reckless experiments or any of the non-authorized uses that Harry had previously used the device for. I actually made it quite clear what I thought of clever experimentation when explaining the note I would send myself. "Arrogant git" was the key phrase if I recall.

What kind of usage is sane? Emergency usage. For example, I would advocate the use of a time turner when locked in a room being tortured and at a high risk of suicide if I do not prevent it. (I liked the touch with the destroying all sharp objects too.) I would also advocate the use for saving lives (including his own depending on circumstances) with minimalist interventions, many of which would be not at all experimental given what he has already safely gotten away with. It would also be extremely valuable in the reduction of risk to have an extra 36 hours available for emergency use. Many threats to Harry's world optimisation plans will come with some warning. Impending attack of some sort, etc. Having a turner on hand means that he would be able to take more time to make preparations or give th device to McGonnagal in the emergency situation and allow her to prepare. As far as either myself or Harry know she isn't wise enough to have one on hand herself.

A time turner is a device that is massively useful and it is massively useful even if you use it conservatively and take no risks with it. Having one on hand does not make bad things happen unless you know you will be unable to control your foolish impulses. This is not Harry's reasoning.

If Harry does not spend at least five minutes thinking through his priorities (let me emphasise that again, spend five minutes) and considering how to acquire (ie. buy) a time turner then both he and the author are making a big mistake. That is *not more rational. It is a rationalization of a decision that was originally made for the purposes of plot balance.

The reasonable solution is clearly for Harry to do is to put "buy time turner" down on his to do list right next to "become ridiculously rich in a week". It is an obvious smart thing to do but the reader understands why Harry can't really follow through with these plans for story purposes. Having them judged "not a pressing priority" is a credible explanation.

Comment author: CronoDAS 30 June 2010 04:29:28AM 1 point [-]

That's a good answer.