JStewart comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 4 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: gjm 07 October 2010 09:12PM

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

Comments (649)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: JStewart 10 October 2010 04:46:04AM 10 points [-]

I have a question about chapter 49 and was wondering if anyone else had a similar reaction. Assuming Quirrell is not lying/wrong, and Voldemort did kill Slytherin's Monster, then my first thought was how unlikely that Slytherin's Monster should have even survived long enough to make it to 1943. No prior Heir of Slytherin had had the same idea? Perhaps no prior Heir of Slytherin had been strong enough to defeat Slytherin's Monster? No prior Heir had been ruthless enough?

Maybe this constitutes weak evidence for the theory that Quirrell is lying.

Comment author: AdShea 11 October 2010 08:55:28PM 5 points [-]

It also could be that the Basillisk has some sort of genetic memory (or DNA-based cognition ala the Super Happies!) such that the monster in the book is not the original monster but rather a great-great grandwhelp of the original monster. This would allow any heirs to kill their specific monster while the line (and thus memories) are preserved.

(This is of course all predicated on Slytherin realizing that his descendents may be nasty enough to keep knowledge from others by any means possible).

Comment author: wedrifid 16 October 2010 07:18:27AM 3 points [-]

This is of course all predicated on Slytherin realizing that his descendents may be nasty enough to keep knowledge from others by any means possible.

I wonder, did Slytherin actually expect his descendants to be nasty? In MoR quite possibly not.