= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (866)
Is it plausible that Lucius would allow Draco to be that much of an idealist?
Were Robin here, I suspect he would point out that allowing your children to remain innocent and naive is a sign of luxury, and a signal of high status. Lucius would be embarrassed not to have his 11-year-old son appear innocent and naive.
ETA: Childhood innocence is conspicuous consumption!
Yes, and note that Draco expects to spend his life catering to idiots. Harry's upbringing is clearly higher status.
Sure. What would Lucius worry about disillusioning Draco? The anti-pure blood wizards don't have a leg to stand on, unlike theists and atheists.
(Think back - do you recall any good arguments made against pure blood, the theory as opposed to the believers? Rowling assumes we'll instantly identify pure bloodism == racism, and that's that. If they think any harder, most people will fall into the usual trap of thinking that exceptions/brilliant-mudbloods like Hermione Granger disprove pure bloodism, which of course they don't. The history of the Wizarding world is even more consistent with pure bloodism than not!)
It wouldn't just be about Pure Blood. It would be about not having any abstract loyalties of any sort-- Malfoys want to be in charge because it's more comfortable at the top.