nickernst comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 2 - Less Wrong

13 Post author: dclayh 01 August 2010 10:58PM

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

Comments (696)

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

Comment author: gwern 02 August 2010 03:15:37PM 6 points [-]

The big speech by Quirrel troubles me.

I thought we had Word of God that Quirrel was in some way Voldemort (Quirrelmort), and that we should've become certain of that early on (especially with the Voyager horcrux implied).

But the speech doesn't make sense for me. If Voldemort was so close to winning, if it took a freak Black Swan to defeat him and his followers, if magical England is still utterly incompetent, if many of his followers are still at large (as we know from canon they are), if...

Given this situation, why doesn't Voldemort just start over? The plan worked perfectly the first time; why not just do it again, and put a little poison in Harry's drink or something? There are a bazillion ways Harry could be killed, as Harry himself demonstrates in the killer-instinct lesson. The magical protection he has is very weak indeed.

If a magical England all bearing a 'Light Mark' would be so unstoppable and take over the magical world, and by implication then can take over the mundane world, why doesn't Voldemort just take over magical England the way he planned to, and then impose the Light/Dark Mark on everyone?

Why is he instead apparently doing his damndest to prevent anyone from succeeding the way 'he' almost did, and apparently pushing Draco or Harry to become benevolent dictators?

I don't understand it at all. I can't reconcile Voldemort's past with Quirrel's past with Voldemort's past goals with Quirrel's future goals and so on. I am, as the LW phrase goes, confused.

Comment author: [deleted] 04 August 2010 02:02:15AM 5 points [-]

We had a hint that Quirrell is in some way Voldemort, but how exactly? We haven't been given information from anyone but Quirrell on that. They went to the same dojo. Physically, that's nearly all we've been told, by an unreliable source. The only other physical hint is Quirrell's zombie/alertness transition.

The questions are these: Are they two distinct individuals? How distinct and why? Have they always been so or not so? And is each aware of the other?

Here's another idea, no more motivated than the idea that Q=V. Perhaps when "tuning in", Quirrell is not channeling Voldemort. Rather, Quirrell has a "mysterious dark side" which feeds him ideas when he is in zombie-mode. Neither the former Quirrell, or the remains of Voldemort were powerful enough to impact magical Britain sufficiently to satisfy their goals. Additionally, their goals did not match perfectly. A trade was made; a partial exchange of utility functions, and perhaps something more.

Voldemort's magical knowledge was vast and useful; if someone thought himself to be terribly clever, and thought that he was less of a fool than the now-failed Dark Lord, and sought power, he might make a deal with the devil; confine the mind to a tightly sealed box instead of destroying it. In exchange for this life-saving act, knowledge. And with every exchange, there could be some influence on each other's values. Maybe he's already admitted that he's going to lose - the mind will get out of the box by the end, and he will cease to be distinguishable. But as a new challenge, he bet he could transfer the best of his knowledge and goals to Harry Potter before then, enough to defeat whatever would grow from his mental corpse.

Or not. All sorts of things are possible with the little information we have. The most mysterious repeating phenomenon that's notable right now is Quirrell's zombie-mode. For just his political views and most of his behavior, being Voldemort is not the simplest explanation.

Comment author: gwern 04 August 2010 03:24:57AM *  1 point [-]

I like your utility-exchange idea. That explains the problem of why Quirrel isn't seeking power in his own right - because to do so is to inevitably hand power over to the Dark Lord. Hence, he seeks to fashion a better and uncorruptible replacement. Power wouldn't necessarily help him find or groom a protege.

The utility function exchange might be going too far. The trade might just be one of the classic 'loan' or Faustian bargain: Voldemort lends his accumulated skill and knowledge to Quirrel for 15 or 20 years, and in exchange, Quirrel hosts Voldemort (as he did in canon!) and at the end turns over his body to Voldemort and/or merges with him.

At least, this seem to work as well to explain the issues (if there has already been a utility exchange, how have Quirrel's values changed?).

For just his political views and most of his behavior, being Voldemort is not the simplest explanation.

My problem exactly.

Comment author: cousin_it 04 August 2010 04:40:38AM *  0 points [-]

That would be an awesome way for the plot to go. Very "archetypal". The closest analogy would be Baron Harkonnen taking over Alia. I'm almost sad that you posted it, because now Eliezer will either use it or invent something else, and either case would be disappointing.

Comment author: Baughn 04 August 2010 08:22:52AM 0 points [-]

I'd like to think Eliezer isn't the kind of writer who would avoid an idea simply because one of his readers came up with it, especially since there are no legal issues with that here.

No, if he doesn't use it, hopefully that's because he has an even better one.