wedrifid comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 3 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: Unnamed 30 August 2010 05:37AM

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

Comments (560)

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

Comment author: taw 02 September 2010 05:51:28AM 2 points [-]

It quite probably has, and would.

Well, Hermione's sorting is another example of Hat taking person's preferences into account.

Is there any good counter-example?

Me wanting desperately to be a Hufflepuff because it gives me access to a whole lot of Hufflepuffs to be my loyal minions might not be quite so persuasive.

I'd expect people to develop serious plans of taking over the world at some age older than 11, but feel free to write fanfic to the contrary.

But if you believed strongly in value of loyalty, that might be enough. Hermione, Neville, and Peter Pettigrew all seem to have been sorted based on their value system more than on their actual traits - otherwise their sorting makes little sense.

Comment author: wedrifid 02 September 2010 06:21:31AM 6 points [-]

But if you believed strongly in value of loyalty, that might be enough. Hermione, Neville, and Peter Pettigrew all seem to have been sorted based on their value system more than on their actual traits - otherwise their sorting makes little sense.

To be honest I've been running with the "their sorting makes little sense" theory. :)

Comment author: magfrump 06 September 2010 09:14:02AM 0 points [-]

All three were sorted into houses they new people in. This seems to have persuaded that hat a little in canon.

I would think it is likely that the hat would sort people into a house they want to be in.

Also, at age 11, many people haven't fully developed, and putting them in a house is likely to cause them to be more like that house; there's no reason for the hat to be overly picky about putting people where they belong. The actions of a ten-year-old aren't great predictors of future personality.

Although thinking about it, the actions I remember taking as a ten-year-old seem pretty consistent with you I am today, but I would guess that I am an outlier in this regard.

Anyway I don't see any reason to believe that the hat has EVER put someone in a house they didn't want to be in, and I feel like taw is making stronger points despite the upvotes not agreeing with me.

Comment author: KevinC 06 September 2010 09:56:37AM *  3 points [-]

Couldn't a Slytherinny parent who wants their child to become powerful coach their child into wanting to be in some House other than Slytherin? Say, MoR!Lucius, coaching his son in all the ways of seizing power, but telling him awful, awful stories of what it was like to be a Slytherin. "No, no my boy, you do not want to be in that House, whatever you do!" Then, Draco under that Hat goes, "No! No! Not Slytherin! Anything but Slytherin!" And thus, ends up somewhere else.

Thus positioned, he does not automatically have to wear a suspicion-generating Slytherin badge, and he gets to be the wolf among the sheep (if he ends up in Hufflepuff or Gryffindor, where there's no Harry and Hermione to match him). Being Slytherin is like being a Ferengi. People already expect you to scheme against them, so their guard is up. But a Hufflepuff or Gryffindor (especially Gryffindor!) MoR!Draco would start out with powerful advantages in his quest for world domination.

Since "rule the world" and "save the world" aren't really that far apart, he probably would have ended up in Gryffindor. If you want to rule the world, presumably you think you've got a better way to run it than the way it's being run. Some would-be rulers might just want the wealth and being able to boss other people around, but it's easier to get that as a cult leader and not have to have responsibility for administering the global economy.

If you want to save the world, you could be defending the status quo (keeping that other guy from conquering the world), or you could see some threat (climate change, death) that isn't being dealt with appropriately, and you have a better way. In either case, you are tacitly assuming that you have a pretty good idea what's best for the world, and act to see that things go your way. Though I'm over-simplifying a bit here, I think there is an element of "who's writing the history?" to whether one's a "Gryffindor" or a "Slytherin." Andrew Jackson: Gryffindor? Slytherin? What about Che Guevara?

My guess is it would be fairly common for partisans of Utopian movements (Communism, Nazism, religious fundamentalism, etc.) to fancy themselves as Gryffindor-type heroes out to save the world, while their opponents and victims would class them as Slytherins. Where would the Sorting Hat put them? :)

Comment author: wedrifid 06 September 2010 10:09:40AM 1 point [-]

Although thinking about it, the actions I remember taking as a ten-year-old seem pretty consistent with you I am today, but I would guess that I am an outlier in this regard.

You aren't. Most people overestimate the amount that people's personalities are likely to or able to change.

Comment author: magfrump 06 September 2010 06:40:40PM *  2 points [-]

Any chance we could get anecdotal evidence about this? Or better yet studies about it?

How much have you changed since you were 10?

ETA: I google'd it and came up with this but neither I nor my university seems to have a subscription to peek inside.

Comment author: wedrifid 07 September 2010 01:49:14AM *  0 points [-]

Any chance we could get anecdotal evidence about this? Or better yet studies about it?

Without trying to be rude I would actually prefer you just didn't believe me right now. It is a field of enquiry that I haven't researched in a while and it would take me a long time to dig up the resources that I once found convincing. I seem to recall being surprised by identical-twins-raised-apart studies that focussed on the "big five" traits.

How much have you changed since you were 10?

I'm taller and my philosophy has changed (I was raised by religious believers). My interaction with that philosophy and personality is more or less the same (but matured and far more effectively applied.)

ETA: I google'd it and came up with this but neither I nor my university seems to have a subscription to peek inside.

It is not something I have read but my university seems to have access. If you are particularly curious you could message me with an email address.