Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 4

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

[Update: and now there's a fifth discussion thread, which you should probably use in preference to this one. Later update: and a sixth -- in the discussion section, which is where these threads are living for now on. Also: tag for HP threads in the main section, and tag for HP threads in the discussion section.]

The third discussion thread is above 500 comments now, just like the others, so it's time for a new one. Predecessors: one, two, three. For anyone who's been on Mars and doesn't know what this is about: it's Eliezer's remarkable Harry Potter fanfic.

Spoiler warning and helpful suggestion (copied from those in the earlier threads):

Spoiler Warning:  this thread contains unrot13'd spoilers for Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality up to the current chapter and for the original Harry Potter series.  Please continue to use rot13 for spoilers to other works of fiction, or if you have insider knowledge of future chapters of Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality.

A suggestion: mention at the top of your comment which chapter you're commenting on, or what chapter you're up to, so that people can understand the context of your comment even after more chapters have been posted.  This can also help people avoid reading spoilers for a new chapter before they realize that there is a new chapter.

Comments (649)

Sort By: Popular
Comment author: PhilGoetz 05 January 2011 06:31:11PM 3 points [-]

The website hosting MoR now has a popup with audio when you go to it, so it is now NSFW.

Comment author: David_Allen 02 November 2010 09:31:16PM 3 points [-]

Would Harry's patronus block any killing curse, or only one thrown by Quirrell?

Comment author: [deleted] 02 November 2010 04:59:49PM 3 points [-]

With Chapters 55-56, I have some theories regarding Quirrell's true plan. He is Voldemort (or rather contains a piece of Voldemort) but we know he doesn't want Harry dead; he's had ample opportunity to simply murder Harry if that was the goal. I think rescuing Bellatrix is a distraction as well, really nothing more than a cover story or "fortunate side effect" of achieving the true goal. If rescuing Bellatrix was the true goal, he wouldn't have jeopardized the mission by attempting to murder the auror.

I think Quirrell's ultimate goal is the Dementation of Harry, probably in order to draw out Harry's dark side (which I think is the horcrux-fragment of Voldemort). He tried this at Hogwarts and it would have worked if not for Hermione's intervention. Since he was unlikely to be able to bring Dementors to Hogwarts a second time, he concluded that he'd have to bring Harry to Azkaban. The rescue plan is a cover story designed to persuade Harry into going to Azkaban--although I suppose Quirrell figured he might as well make the rescue target someone who could actually be useful to him/Voldemort if freed.

So basically Quirrell deliberately put himself out of commission, thinking that Harry would quickly fall prey to the Dementors in such a situation. The hole in my theory is that this seems like an all-or-nothing play: he's now revealed at least three pieces of important information to Harry (1. His own willingness to kill innocents; 2. The spell-clash aspect of their joined magics--which for my theory to be correct, Quirrell must already have known about; and 3. Quirrell's own insanely-high power level). These three pieces together are probably enough to make Harry suspect that Quirrell is an aspect of Voldemort, once he has the chance to think things through. Quirrell is subtle enough that he should have had a backup plan in place in order to retain Harry's trust in the event that Harry is not Demented, but I can't imagine what that might be. Maybe Quirrell's backup plan involves the Imperius Curse or memory charms or something. I'd say that "Kill Harry" would be the simplest and most obvious backup plan, but I think Voldemort wants/needs Harry alive.

Not a prediction so much as a guess: Bellatrix's Innervate charm did work on Quirrell. He's currently faking unconsciousness (and remaining in the form that gives himself some protection from the Dementors) as he waits to see whether Harry will or will not succumb to Dementation.

Comment author: David_Allen 02 November 2010 09:25:25PM 3 points [-]

So basically Quirrell deliberately put himself out of commission

To counter this, it was Harry's actions that lead to the fight with the auror. Up to the point that Harry almost lost control of his patronus Quirrell had been acting to shield Harry's hearing, perhaps fearing that exact response. I don't think there is any evidence that the fight was inevitable.

Comment author: [deleted] 02 November 2010 10:52:50PM 2 points [-]

I agree that it's unreasonable to expect that Quirrell could have anticipated the entire chain of events that led to the duel with Bahry. However, it's not at all unreasonable to expect that a duel with one or more aurors would occur at some point during the course of breaking in and out of Azkaban, and in fact we know that Quirrell planned for this contingency, because he gave Harry standing orders for what to do if/when it happened. So, while that fight was not inevitable, a fight was always likely.

Comment author: NihilCredo 02 November 2010 07:10:10PM 1 point [-]

I think Quirrell's ultimate goal is the Dementation of Harry, probably in order to draw out Harry's dark side (which I think is the horcrux-fragment of Voldemort). He tried this at Hogwarts and it would have worked if not for Hermione's intervention.

Doesn't work. It was Quirrell (and only Quirrell) who spotted Harry's wand next to the Dementor's cage and alerted Flitwick so he could remove it.

If he had wanted Harry Demented he would have kept his mouth shut.

Comment author: [deleted] 02 November 2010 07:49:44PM 1 point [-]

I think he did that because he didn't want Hermione going in front of the Dementor again -- she was getting too much information from it -- and also because he figured (rightly) that Harry had already received enough exposure for his purposes.

Comment author: Oscar_Cunningham 02 November 2010 05:14:27PM 1 point [-]

But it was more likely that Harry would get picked up be Aurors than Dementors (now it doesn't look that way, but Quirrell couldn't have predicted Harry's actions), and Quirrell wouldn't risk his own arrest.

Comment author: [deleted] 02 November 2010 07:53:14PM 2 points [-]

Yes, my theory definitely depends on believing that Quirrell COULD predict Harry's actions when he cast the killing curse on the auror. You also have to be willing to believe that Quirrell knew Harry would figure out a way to observe the battle, even though he was ostensibly lying out of sight. I think the first is more of a stretch than the second. Anyone who knows Harry at all could predict that he would try to find a way to spy on the battle: using the Patronus to block the Killing Curse is a much more specific action that only somebody who understands Harry really well would be able to predict. I guess I'm willing to believe that Quirrell does understand Harry that well.

Comment author: wedrifid 02 November 2010 08:24:59PM *  3 points [-]

Patronus to block the Killing Curse is a much more specific action that only somebody who understands Harry really well would be able to predict. I guess I'm willing to believe that Quirrell does understand Harry that well.

Harry really isn't that hard to predict... If he had a few moments spare I can even imagine him giving an impassioned speech on the subject before he used the patronus.

Comment author: David_Allen 02 November 2010 09:29:57PM 1 point [-]

Could Quirrell have guessed that Harry's patronus would block a killing curse? That seems like a stretch.

Comment author: NihilCredo 02 November 2010 06:59:14PM 1 point [-]

New thread after 500 comments.

Comment author: cousin_it 02 November 2010 11:48:54AM *  3 points [-]

I've figured out what Harry's "sense of doom" reminds me of. The old action movie Timecop with Van Damme. The antagonist there used a clever plot to help a younger version of himself succeed in the past, but they had to avoid touching because "the same matter cannot occupy the same space". In the end the protagonist forces them to touch, whereupon they both die in freaky fashion and disappear from the timeline. But it's probably just another of Eliezer's clever shout-outs, not an actual clue.

Comment author: DaveX 01 November 2010 09:28:15PM *  2 points [-]

Chap 65:

Harry's treatment of the different (agents?) in his head make me wonder about the MOR Horcrux mechanics and the possibility of making copies of a being. If the horcrux copying process is repetatively damaging, like analog copies of a wax cyinder recording, there would be a degradation in each stage, and the last horcrux, Harry would be the poorest copy. Or if each horcux was same-quality, there might have been only something like limitations on the first analog-digital conversion, and successive generations of copies might be exact, like digital-to-digital. The ability to copy consciousness is interesting. One can, a la Star Trek transporters, destroy the original to keep from having duplicates, you could let either the scanning process not destroy things, or you could make the construction process repeatable. High-fidelity digital reproduction make software and IP copies have constant marginal cost, and I wonder what that might mean for copies of consciousness.

If Voldemort can have a number of horcruxes, each of which can regenerate a new Voldy, why can't he generate multiple selves from them? Would a being with the ability to copy itself do so, or not? A team of Voldemorts, or post-horcrux-Voldemorts would be more powerful and resilient than a single one. Or is Voldemort too selfish to work with himself?

Comment author: TobyBartels 02 November 2010 05:05:57AM 5 points [-]

Would a being with the ability to copy itself do so, or not?

Most of them do, for reasons that should be obvious.

Comment author: DaveX 02 November 2010 03:33:22PM 1 point [-]

Copying mind state differs from sexual or asexual reproduction. I was wondering how the MOR soul-splitting, copying, backup, imprinting, and possession mechanism works and how it might be exploited.

Could, for instance, Harry split his soul into its separate agents without the act of murder? Or is the important part of the Horcrux magic stealing someone's soul to use as media to make a copy your own soul? How close are Harry's suppositions in Ch20 to the MOR-reality?

Comment author: wedrifid 02 November 2010 03:49:12PM 3 points [-]

Could, for instance, Harry split his soul into its separate agents without the act of murder? Or is the important part of the Horcrux magic stealing someone's soul to use as media to make a copy your own soul? How close are Harry's suppositions in Ch20 to the MOR-reality?

Evidence for a 'soul' and the need to eliminate another in order to do horcrux like magic gives some credence to theories that MoR is in a simulated world. You need to wipe out an existing virtual machine in order to put an extra instance of yours there, splitting your own may require dividing your 'soul/computational resources' between multiple instances, etc.

Comment author: cousin_it 01 November 2010 11:19:56AM *  9 points [-]

Chapters 55-56: disappointment. Harry recovered way too easily, if the story were consistent he'd be screaming on the floor until the Aurors arrived. The obstacle of Bahry's future testimony shouldn't have been so easy to remove, now I'm suspicious that Eliezer will deal with the obstacles posed by McGonagall, Dumbledore and others in the same fashion. In general, the end of Ch. 54 seems to promise all hell breaking loose, 55 undoes that, tries to build more suspense instead, and fails to be believable because it erased previous suspense too easily. It's like a prelude that promised a fugue and didn't deliver. But the part where Harry momentarily thinks of Bellatrix as a good unquestioning minion was one of those moments of brilliance that I love the fic for.

The best description of hell breaking loose I've ever read was the first part of Dostoevsky's "The Idiot". I first read it assuming it would be a difficult work of "serious" literature, and it totally upset my expectations by being more exciting than any "fun" literature I'd seen. Here's how it goes: all the heroes and the main conflict are introduced in the first couple pages, then the situation quickly becomes tense, then passions begin to flare up, then the whole thing explodes while we're not even halfway into the chapter, and when you expect it to subside it explodes some more instead, then more and more, and unbelievably the chaos just keeps growing until the last page of Part 1 when it ends with a couple paragraphs and you have to close the book rather than read on to Part 2, because you're shaking and you need to work out who was thinking what.

Comment author: Eneasz 05 November 2010 03:41:39PM 8 points [-]

disappointment. Harry recovered way too easily, if the story were consistent he'd be screaming on the floor until the Aurors arrived.

I've thought about this a bit. Emotionally, I agree with you. But all the counter-arguments make sense. I've finally narrowed it down to a single sentence, at the end of Chapter 54:

(And then it was already too late.)

This sentence is epic. It sent shivers down my spine when I first read it. It resounds with finality. The jig is up. The battle has been lost. Despair, all ye mighty. I couldn't wait for the next installment to find Harry waking up in an holding cell with his plans crumbling about him, desperately thinking his way out of this jam without giving up his friend.

Now, I do actually enjoy the next two chapters. But the promise of finality was broken. Ch55 starts out with "And then it was already too late... PSYCH! It's not too late at all!" It feels like the X-men comic books I'd read as a kid, which on the cover showed our heroes dead or mortally wounded, the villain of the month triumphant above them, but when you grab the comic and read it you find that nothing like that happens in the story.

If that line was removed (or at least changed to not be so Final) the transition between 54 and 55 wouldn't be jarring.

Comment author: cousin_it 05 November 2010 06:10:28PM 1 point [-]

Harry waking up in an holding cell with his plans crumbling about him, desperately thinking his way out of this jam without giving up his friend

Prisoner's Dilemma, huh? :-) I had the same hopes for 55. Right now it looks like Harry will escape the mess without losing anything. Whyyy? Corwin of Amber had a spectacular failure that got him imprisoned and blinded, and the story was better for it.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 05 November 2010 03:58:25PM *  1 point [-]

I think you're right. The power of that line even confused me into jumping to conclusion that Quirrell died, despite a much better explanation. The book will be better if this device is changed.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 02 November 2010 11:36:38PM 5 points [-]

Harry recovered way too easily, if the story were consistent he'd be screaming on the floor until the Aurors arrived.

Well, to the accusation of inconsistency I will respond that (a) Harry is not standing five paces away from a Dementor this time and (b) he has been strengthened somewhat by previous realizations, thus he does not instantly fall over and gets a chance to recover.

Comment author: PeerInfinity 02 November 2010 07:30:03PM *  4 points [-]

Chapters 55-56: disappointment. Harry recovered way too easily, if the story were consistent he'd be screaming on the floor until the Aurors arrived.

I agree entirely.

In chapter 52, I was able to empathize with Harry. I felt what he was feeling. And the feelings were was surprisingly intense.

But in the next chapters the story just started getting too unrealistic, and Harry became an impossibly superpowered character, and I lost my emotional connection with him.

This was a constant problem throughout the rest of the story too, but the problem is especially egregious in this story arc. And the impossibly-superpoweredness kept escalating.

Chapter 52 was vaguely plausible.

Chapter 53 might have been plausible, if Harry had a lot of time to prepare.

Chapter 54 was only slightly less realistic than chapter 53.

And I thought that after Chapter 54, this story arc was over. Harry failed at his mission, and just had to keep from losing his mind entirely before the aurors found him and he had to face the consequences of his actions.

But then in chapter 55, he made a miraculous recovery. Noone could recover like that. Not even Eliezer Himself could recover like that.

From then on, this wasn't a story about a real person, it was a story about an impossibly superpowered character, and the story lost almost all of its emotional impact.

I still think Harry should have just given up, and turned himself in to the aurors. I don't see how this could possibly end well, and Harry's actions in chapters 55 and 56 are just making things a whole lot worse.

But this is a story, and so of course it's going to end well, no matter how stupid or reckless the protagonist seems to be acting.

It's still an awesome story though, it's just that the suspension of disbelief is gone.

But that's just my opinion. Your Mileage May Vary.

EDIT: ok, I accept Eliezer's explanation and David Allen's explanation of why Harry was able to recover. I take back my complaint about Harry's recovery being unrealistic. But, not knowing what Harry's plan is in chapters 55 and 56, it still seems to me like Harry would have been better off giving up.

Comment author: David_Allen 02 November 2010 09:49:15PM *  7 points [-]

Harry became an impossibly superpowered character

One of Harry's established traits is his highly trained reflex to question his own perceptions, especially under difficult circumstances.

This situation is probably the most extreme that we have seen Harry in. In this context that ability comes across as a super-power, but it is not out-of-character.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 02 November 2010 08:15:33PM 1 point [-]

I agree with most of your comments, but -

But this is a story, and so of course it's going to end well, no matter how stupid or reckless the protagonist seems to be acting.

So you'd offer 4-1 odds on that bet?

Comment author: PeerInfinity 02 November 2010 08:38:02PM *  2 points [-]

sorry, what I should have said is that the story as a whole will end well. It's still possible that Harry's actions in this particular story arc will have disastrous consequences, that Harry will have to try to fix later. It's also very likely that Harry won't be able to fix all of the disastrous consequences.

but I would still offer 1-1 odds that this particular story arc will end without disastrous consequences... though there is some ambiguity about what counts as "disastrous".

um... oops... did I just challenge Eliezer to not give this story a happy ending? I want a happy ending. or at least a bittersweet ending. It's just that I would prefer if the protagonist didn't recklessly get into impossible situations that he then goes on to use impossible superpowers to get out of.

And what happened to Harry having learned how to lose? This seems like a situation where losing immediately is the best option. The more Harry resists, the worse things will be when he loses. Unless something really improbable happens.

Anyway, I expect that all of these things that I'm complaining about are probably a case of "the plot demands it". It would have been nice if Eliezer could have avoided these problems, but sometimes you just can't please everyone.

Also, we won't know for sure if Harry is holding the idiot ball until we find out what his plan is, hopefully in the next chapter.

oh, and is it just me, or are the words "trust the author" really unconvincing? I mean, if you already know how generally awesome Eliezer is, it's a whole lot easier to trust him as an author, but those words would be entirely unconvincing to anyone who hasn't heard of Eliezer before... though he has already earned lots of trust with the previous chapters...

Comment author: PhilGoetz 03 November 2010 05:14:08PM *  1 point [-]

(Harry having to learn how to lose was great.)

Remember "The Cold Equations"? I wouldn't be shocked if Eliezer wound the entire fanfic up with some similar message.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 03 November 2010 06:54:10PM 4 points [-]

I remember the extensive discussion about "The Cold Equations", in which it was concluded that the only way that sort of tragedy could be generated would be if there was massive organizational incompetence.

Stowaways were a known problem. Why wasn't the spaceship locked? Why was there a door on the closet?

I think a reasonably happy ending is forced for MOR. Harry survives. So do other major good characters. However, perhaps a MFAI (Magical FAI) is created, and power and responsibility are handed off to it. What would Harry do with the rest of eternity then?

Comment author: PeerInfinity 05 November 2010 04:47:45AM 1 point [-]

What would Harry do with the rest of eternity then?

Harry will invent Fun Theory, of course. And then he'll spend the rest of eternity testing and improving this Fun Theory.

Comment author: Alicorn 03 November 2010 07:26:10PM 5 points [-]

What would Harry do with the rest of eternity then?

I think there's textual evidence suggesting that he would have descendants and then attend a lot of birthday parties on celestial objects.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 04 November 2010 12:32:31AM 3 points [-]

He might still enjoy exploring how magic works-- I expect it's as rich a field as physics. (Last I heard, the idea that physics may offer unlimited depths is still respectable.)

Ending for a rationalist fairy tale: And then they learned how to live happily ever after.

Comment author: MartinB 03 November 2010 07:22:40PM 1 point [-]

No no no no no. Not a stupid space Aesop as in the cold equation. No!

Comment author: whpearson 01 November 2010 12:34:50PM *  3 points [-]

Even with Bahry obliviated there should be lots of clues it was Harry. Especially now that Quirrell is down and whatever spells he was casting to confound the wizarding equivalent of forensics are probably down. Harry sized foot prints in the dust, cloth fibers where Harry lay down? The angle/position that the stunning spell hit Bahry implying it was cast from a low elevation?

Or to put it another way who are the Wizarding community going to think did this?

Ex-death eaters? Not killing Bahry is a sign that it is not them. The unusual patronus that seemed to be able to hide Bellatrix, and will possibly kill Dementors next chapter, has the hallmarks of Harry.

If they didn't know about the existence of time turners then they might be fooled, but he has used them so much, it is really a poor alibi.

So yeah put me in the camp of all hell should still be breaking loose even if Harry doesn't get caught red handed in Azkaban.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 02 November 2010 08:16:42PM 5 points [-]

Even with Bahry obliviated there should be lots of clues it was Harry. Especially now that Quirrell is down and whatever spells he was casting to confound the wizarding equivalent of forensics are probably down. Harry sized foot prints in the dust, cloth fibers where Harry lay down? The angle/position that the stunning spell hit Bahry implying it was cast from a low elevation?

The wizarding world doesn't stoop to non-magical forensics. Footprints? Fibers? How barbaric.

Comment author: David_Allen 01 November 2010 04:57:06PM 2 points [-]

I don't think that it is obvious to most of the other characters that it is a patronus that is hiding Bellatrix. It would also be discounted because she remains invisible under the cloak after Harry's patronus is extinguished in Ch. 56.

Canon Dumbledore would have observed the masking power of Harry's patronus, and would be clever enough to to guess that the Harry's cloak could have this property. Presumably the HPMOR Dumbledore is at least this clever.

Dumbledore however observed Harry's extreme response to an unshielded dementor, so he might be confused at a Harry that walks around unprotected and apparently unaffected.

Working against Harry is that Dumbledore's patronus could be used to identify Harry's patronus as the one it observed in Azkaban, and that any dementor that observes Harry, and survives, could also identify him. It seems that if Dumbledore wants to later verify or exclude Harry as the intruder, he can.

Comment author: Danylo 01 November 2010 03:43:58AM *  6 points [-]

Slight spoilers for those who haven't read chapter 55:

My god, Harry is infuriating. Why, after realizing that Quirrell might have set him up, after deciding to doubt everything Quirrell said about the plan (and needlessly dismissing his doubts), did he assume that there really is a magical psychologist to fix Mme.Black up?

Why, after deconstructing his predicament did he then fail to apply the same rationalism to its immediate effect? Ugh. If there's one scene that convinced me that he's under the Imperius curse, it's his thinking up ways of convincing the likely-fictional-Doctor of healing the likely-uncurable maniac.

These past 5 chapters have been as infuriating as thrilling. I hope Harry stops being human and once again becomes his hyper-rationalist self at some point in the near future.

P.S. Does anyone else find dramatic irony to be the most infuriating, anxiety-inducing literary tool known to man?

Comment author: NihilCredo 01 November 2010 03:59:28AM 8 points [-]

P.S. Does anyone else find dramatic irony to be the most infuriating, anxiety-inducing literary tool known to man?

No, I personally find it a close second to the comedy of errors (which I just plain cannot watch or read, I instinctively curl up in a fetal position or storm out of the room upon exposure - being unjustly blamed is my biggest rage button by far).

Comment author: Unnamed 01 November 2010 05:45:48AM *  4 points [-]

chp 55

Cognitive therapy as a pre-Patronus intervention in early stage Dementation

Comment author: David_Allen 29 October 2010 05:51:07PM 1 point [-]

The rot13 use is becoming excessive in this forum, there is already a spoiler warning on the post. Let EY make a special request for it when he thinks speculation goes too far.

Comment author: Unnamed 29 October 2010 09:13:06PM 8 points [-]

I think the policy should be that you do not need to rot13 anything about HMPOR or the original Harry Potter series unless you are posting insider information from Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).

If there is evidence for X in MOR and/or canon then it's fine to post about X without rot13, even if you also have heard privately from Eliezer that X is true. But you should not post that "Eliezer said X is true" unless you use rot13.

More specificallly, (and I have to use rot13 here), vg'f svar gb jevgr nobhg Ibyqrzbeg pbagebyyvat Dhveeryy (jvgubhg hfvat ebg13), ohg lbh qb arrq gb hfr ebg13 vs lbh zragvba gur qryrgrq nhgube'f abgr nobhg gung be pynvz gung Jbeq bs Tbq unf rfgnoyvfurq gung D=I.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 29 October 2010 10:24:06PM 2 points [-]

I affirm that this is what I think the policy should be. Speculation does not require spoilers.

Comment author: Random832 11 April 2012 01:49:00PM 3 points [-]

Downvoted for endorsing a policy that requires people to keep track of whether something is still in the current version of the fic. I didn't know until today that the thing Unnamed put in rot13 had been "disrevealed".

Comment author: wedrifid 13 April 2012 09:35:56AM 1 point [-]

Downvoted for endorsing a policy that requires people to keep track of whether something is still in the current version of the fic. I didn't know until today that the thing Unnamed put in rot13 had been "disrevealed".

I only just discovered what you meant here. I totally agree. Enforcement of 'unrevelation' spoiler policies is utterly absurd and is a norm that I would oppose rather than support.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 29 October 2010 06:05:11PM 2 points [-]

I wonder how difficult it would be to add a "Rot13 this" button to the options under each text item (that is, next to "Vote up" and "Vote down" and so forth).

That would significantly reduce the nuisance factor associated with reading r13'd posts, without the site having to give up whatever value it is people see in using them.

Not that I'm offering to write the code, or anything actually useful like that. Just ruminating.

Comment author: Perplexed 29 October 2010 06:13:25PM 5 points [-]

This is not an endorsement of the add-on , but if you use Firefox

Comment author: TheOtherDave 29 October 2010 06:22:20PM 2 points [-]

/dave feels sheepish/

Yes, of course there would be such a thing, and I ought to have looked for it rather than proposing that the feature be built into the site itself. Clearly, my intuitions have been distorted by working on self-contained rather then Web apps for too many years.

Thanks for both the thought and the pointer.

Comment author: JGWeissman 29 October 2010 06:17:00PM 3 points [-]

If we are going automate this, we should just use spoiler tags, so the marked text can be revealed on highlighting, or when a button is clicked or whatever.

Comment author: thomblake 29 October 2010 06:12:54PM 1 point [-]

EY has made such a special request for it, and most of the rot13 content here is in compliance with that particular request.

Comment author: shokwave 29 October 2010 05:46:53AM *  4 points [-]

It occurred to me that Harry is confused with Hermione's reactions (possibly Dumbledore's) not because he is a consequentialist and she is a deontologist, but rather because he hasn't yet realised that offending her is a consequence of being a consequentialist, and so he should include "deviates from deontological ethics; may offend friends and society" as one of the negative consequences for actions that otherwise seem right by consequentialism.

Comment author: Unnamed 29 October 2010 05:39:04AM 4 points [-]

So, what's the importance of Roger Bacon's diary? Canon & conservation of detail both suggest it's something, possibly a horcrux or possibly some other tool of Quirrelmort. This Voldemort is too smart to horcrux his own diary, but this diary would be an awfully convenient trojan horse for him to have (extremely durable, treasured by Harry).

It doesn't seem to produce any sense of Doom, though, which seems to count against the horcrux hypothesis.

Could Quirrell be using it to spy on Harry, to get his curiously accurate priors? Does Harry keep the diary in the pouch which he carries around everywhere, and which he brought to Azkaban, and which the Quirrell cast a spell on and entered in snake mode? If so, it could be a part of Quirrell's current plot. (Or, Quirrell could've done something else with Harry's pouch, which doesn't involve the diary.)

Comment author: JoshuaZ 29 October 2010 01:33:01PM 5 points [-]

It doesn't seem to produce any sense of Doom, though, which seems to count against the horcrux hypothesis.

In canon Harry's sense of pain when encountering Voldemort doesn't occur when encountering horcruxes. Moreover, it turns out that Harry is an accidental horcrux and he doesn't have any similar reaction to himself, or even to a time traveled version of himself that he sees. So by analogy a horcrux here may not be enough to trigger the sense of doom.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 29 October 2010 01:09:45PM 4 points [-]

Could Roger Bacon's diary have important information in it?

I would be pleased if Quirrel was using the diary to affect Harry (whether by getting Harry to accept a gift or by some magic-related method), but Harry read it with more knowledge and/or attention and/or willingness to make deductions, and got some crucial addition to his abilities thereby.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 29 October 2010 01:38:10AM *  6 points [-]

Consider how, in 51-54, Harry decides to trust Quirrell. No one ought to trust Quirrell, at all. He has some agenda, which he does not let on to. Even if he did describe his complete agenda, you'd never be able to trust that he was telling the truth, because he's so rational and self-controlled that he would be equally able to tell you something almost the truth, except for certain modifications made to make your cooperation more likely.

And few people trust Harry; and with good reason.

The more rational someone is, the less you can trust them. The less rational someone is, the more you can trust them. You can trust a bigot to keep acting bigoted. You can trust a religious zealot to stay true to her faith. You can trust someone who votes the party line without thinking to keep voting the party line.

Whereas, a religious zealot who actually thinks about her religious principles is much less reliable. The Jesuits are a perfect example of this - religious, but prone to thinking about their religion, and thus a neverending source of heresy and controversy within the Church. A politician who actually thinks about the issues might break with his party, or vote differently than the people who elected him expected.

How much does society rely on our irrationality, on our inability to change our minds or avoid signalling our true intent, and our inability to avoid following through on our emotional commitments (revenge, punishment, reward, nepotism)? What's the social cost of rationality? Is it reasonable to think that people have evolved to be less-than-optimally rational?

Comment author: wedrifid 02 November 2010 02:02:41PM 1 point [-]

The more rational someone is, the less you can trust them. The less rational someone is, the more you can trust them.

This is not always the case. In fact, in practice I trust rational people far more than those that are irrational. If I know what a rational person's goals are, know the respective payoffs for each of the various available options then I can reliably predict what the rational person will do. Irrational people can not always be counted on to do what is in their own best interest - this makes them less predictable than they would be if they were rational unless they are an adversary trying specifically to foil your intelligence.

Comment author: shokwave 29 October 2010 06:03:09AM *  7 points [-]

The more rational someone is, the less you can trust them. The less rational someone is, the more you can trust them.

I think in this post when you say 'trust' you really mean 'predict'. A trivial counterexample: the more rational someone is, the more I can trust them to be free of errors in their reasoning. And it IS easier to predict a religious zealot staying religious, or predict that a bigot will remain bigoted, than it is to predict a rational agent attempting to maximize their utility (especially if you're an obstacle to their utility).

Is it reasonable to think that people have evolved to be less-than-optimally rational?

Well, yes, if there was some shortcut that gave the mostly-optimal answer, or gave the optimal answer most of the time, and gave it in a significantly faster time than optimal rationality. The common example is, I think, reacting to the presence of a lion. Abject, heart-pounding, run-for-your-life terror is not optimally rational (it generally precludes climbing a tree) but it gives a mostly-optimal answer in a much shorter time than attempting to reason out the optimal course of action.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 29 October 2010 09:05:54PM 2 points [-]

But what if our irrationalities aren't quick-and-dirty heuristics optimized for speed? What known cognitive biases are even applicable to running away from a lion?

What if some of our cognitive biases are evolved adaptations that make human society work better? It would be pretty surprising to me if this weren't the case!

Comment author: TheOtherDave 29 October 2010 09:28:50PM 4 points [-]

Just because they are evolved, doesn't mean they are optimal. An evolved adaptation can be just as "dirty" as a fast cognitive heuristic; the architectural constraints of learning through genes can be just as constraining as those of coming up with something to do fast.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 31 October 2010 01:44:57AM 1 point [-]

I've put forward a hypothetical, not claimed a proof. What's the point of responding, "But that isn't necessarily the case"?

Comment author: TheOtherDave 31 October 2010 05:29:25AM 2 points [-]

You know, you're right. I was responding to peripheral aspects of your proposal rather than central ones, which is a waste of everyone's time. My apologies.

So, OK... rolling back: if I'm understanding you, you're hypothesizing that our biases are not design flaws, but rather adaptations to obtain the group-level benefit of having individuals be more irrational and therefore predictable.

(Is that right? I'm trying to infer a positive claim out of a series of questions, which is always tricky; if I've misunderstood your hypothetical it might be helpful to restate it more explicitly.)

Perhaps irrationality does provide a group-level benefit, as you suggest. For example, maybe it's easier to get valuable group behaviors by manipulating irrational people than by cooperating with rational ones. That doesn't strike me as too plausible, but it's possible.

Even granting that, though, I have trouble with the idea that the benefit to individual breeders exceeds the costs to the individual of being more easily manipulated by others.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 29 October 2010 09:56:29PM 4 points [-]

Yes, and let me add to that, just because something was adaptive when humans evolved doesn't mean it is at all adaptive now. To use a concrete example, the weight humans put on anecdotes is likely connected to the fact that in our ancestral environment, that was the primary source of data about what the risks around us were. However, now this leads to silly things like people being terribly scared of shark attacks precisely due to the rarity of such attacks making them get a lot of news coverage.

Comment author: shokwave 30 October 2010 03:31:54AM *  1 point [-]

Okay, not evolved adaptations, but how about culturally/socially imprinted cognitive biases? Something about

What if some of our cognitive biases are evolved adaptations that make human society work better?

clicks with Nancy's comment here.

The more I thought about it ... it seemed like rational agents couldn't trust anyone (the best course is to convince them to trust you and then betray them while never trusting anyone yourself) except in the early and middle stages of iterated games. But a society where everyone irrationally trusted everyone else, and irrationally nobody betrayed anyone else, would be more successful than the 'rational agent' community. (all things being equal; if their irrational trust also caused them to irrationally trust lions...) It might stretch the word evolution too much, but I think the term "competitive selection" applies to this process of societies competing with each other for growth and the most effective societies wiping out the less effective societies (wiping out or completely integrating, as the lesser society's land and resources would already be purposed towards supporting a society, and therefore more desirable than land requiring work).

Basically, what if 'trust' is because a society where everyone trusts the other guy to cooperate in a PD was successful enough to dominate the landscape?

NB: Originally I had thought of trust as a sort of greenbearding. Is there an analogous concept in sociocultural evolution?

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 30 October 2010 12:10:43PM 2 points [-]

it seemed like rational agents couldn't trust anyone (the best course is to convince them to trust you and then betray them while never trusting anyone yourself) except in the early and middle stages of iterated games.

In the real world, the iteration never completely ends.

Comment author: Perplexed 30 October 2010 03:54:05AM *  3 points [-]

A population or society in which everyone trusts completely is not an ESS. A population or society in which everyone adopts the slogan "trust, but verify" and cooperates in the punishment of defectors and non-punishing freeriders probably is an ESS, assuming the cost of verification and punishment are low and verification is reasonably effective.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 29 October 2010 01:12:06PM 4 points [-]

This gets to one of the Hard Problems, both for FAI and a great deal of life. How can you tell who can be trusted to do a good job of taking your interests into account?

Comment author: thomblake 29 October 2010 01:40:15PM 1 point [-]

Your second quote is ill-formatted.

Comment author: Unnamed 28 October 2010 05:14:43PM 1 point [-]

chp 54

So much for Harry's intent to kill. The Most Dangerous Student in the Classroom gets to his first real battle and he does just the opposite.

I guess Harry's Gryffindor/Patronus side is leading the way here, not his Slytherin/dark side (as I mentioned in the last paragraph of my other comment).

Comment author: JoshuaZ 28 October 2010 06:00:32PM 10 points [-]

Well, it wasn't an individual who deserved death. Harry may have an intent to kill but he isn't going to direct it at someone like an Auror without a lot more provocation.

Comment author: rabidchicken 27 October 2010 08:02:50PM *  7 points [-]

The way I understand it, MOR is meant to be an example of how a rational being might go about approaching a completely new and confusing set of observations, such as discovering that magic is real. However, I think harry has missed a lot of the low hanging fruit he could be researching. Although my suspension of disbelief shut down these thoughts pretty fast when I first started reading, I was always pretty curious about why magic was created in the first place, why only certain people could control it, and how exactly the energy needed for spells was obtained and applied. So here are a few things I would want to research ASAP if I was harry.

A) Is it possible to fool the source of magic (sm) so that it allows a muggle to cast spells? It was pretty safe for harry to rule out the idea that your DNA contains all the information needed to create a complex mechanism which can generate a magical field and respond intelligently to your intentions, so it makes sense that your DNA only serves as a signal that tells an external force to activate spells when you verbally or non verbally cast them. However, this raises a few interesting questions. does sm actually read everyone's DNA constantly/ whenever they try to cast a spell? or does the sequence of DNA cause a more obvious external change to your appearance that sm looks for? If it uses something like the pattern of your brainwaves, the shape of your face, etc as a marker, then it may be possible for a muggle to mimic a magic user easily and vice versa, but if it actually DOES read your DNA, then where? Could you grow a heart using a magicians DNA, have it implanted, and acquire magical abilities? For that matter, if you preserved the body of a dead wizard, and set up a electric transmitter in their mind which mimicked the signals sent when someone cast a spell, what would the effect be? Any recognition system should be possible to fool, and this would be the most important thing to test for me. Imagine being able to give every person dying of thirst or hunger in the world unlimited access to the resources they need. there would be no more third world countries, although you would also be distributing a terrible weapon.Which actually brings up another question...

B) Why on earth would you invent a powerful system for allowing someone to directly effect reality with their thoughts, and then let everyone with the right DNA use it with no inhibitions whatsoever? Avada Kedavera, Imperio, and fiendfyre may have their uses, but I would not let all of my ancestors use them without supervision with no more training then it takes to cast any other kind of spell. It would be as idiotic as giving everyone I knew the codes required to launch a nuclear missile whenever or wherever they wanted too using their cellphones. Even if they all had good intentions, someone is going to make a dumb mistake eventually. Creating a system for inhibiting the use of such spells would be complex, but only an idiot would not try. This has several implications for harry, either magic was invented by a moron, there are even MORE powerful spells out there that he could cast if he knew the access codes (!!!), or someone already found out how to game the restrictions so they fell apart long ago and nobody even realizes they exist, you may even be able to get it working again.

C) the SM has to have a a sustainable energy source somewhere, a method for using this energy to create the effects we call spells, and in order for it to perform the complicated routines needed to assess someones intentions, it probably has to be somewhat intelligent. Somewhere out there may be an AI, a group of slaves being used to perform observations and calculations, or the work is being sent on a distributed computing network to the minds of every sentient being on the planet. this may be the hardest thing to research since there are almost an infinite variety of of possible systems which may be the cause, and it is probably concealed. But, If you could find the physical source of magic, you could reprogram it to do whatever you wanted, and could achieve world peace or destruction in one step

I would write more but I am honestly hoping for people to actually read through this and give their thoughts, so I guess I had better stop now in the hope of remaining somewhat concise.

Comment author: MartinB 28 October 2010 09:23:56AM 3 points [-]

Harry makes mistakes too. He once planned out a whole series of experiments only to have the first one turn out way different that expected. I hope there is a completely usefull justified explanation for magic, but even if not it was well worth reading. Hopefully it is not something like scrapped princess.

Comment author: Document 28 October 2010 07:22:30AM 3 points [-]

In chapter 30, Harry makes himself pass out by casting Luminos 12 times rapidly. That could be a foothold for investigating the effects of casting magic on the human body; he could see if he can replicate the result consistently, then try it with different spells or combinations of spells and different rates of casting, and possibly other varied conditions.

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 27 October 2010 10:06:15PM 12 points [-]

The "low hanging fruit" which you argue Harry ought be researching... they seem to involve organ transplants and the manipulation of dead bodies with "electric transmitters in their mind which mimicked the signal sent when someone cast a test".

Are you serious? How the hell would a first-year student of Hogwarts perform these experiment? How can you call these "low hanging fruit"?

Comment author: Oscar_Cunningham 27 October 2010 10:08:07PM 8 points [-]

But, If you could find the physical source of magic, you could reprogram it to do whatever you wanted, and could achieve world peace or destruction in one step.

I think that many people here would disagree with you about how easy FAI is.

Comment author: Karl 27 October 2010 09:19:51PM 5 points [-]

A) is very hard to test given the restriction on using magic around muggles. As for B), powerful spells are mostly restricted by the edict of Merlin. C) is, as you pointed out, extremely difficult to research effectively. I'm more surprised that Harry never bothered to ask how new charms are discovered. After all, how are you supposed to figure out that you are supposed to say "Wingardium Leviosa" and then move your wand in a certain way? And he as been told that new charms were discovered every year, so we know it's possible.

Comment author: Document 28 October 2010 09:24:37AM 5 points [-]

IIRC, in canon they tend to talk about spells being "invented" rather than discovered. For a while I pictured advanced wizards somehow writing particular programs into the Source of Magic, which were then run by saying the spell name; or at least something like that.

Comment author: Vaniver 27 October 2010 10:28:08PM 3 points [-]

Avada Kedavera, Imperio, and fiendfyre may have their uses, but I would not let all of my ancestors use them without supervision with no more training then it takes to cast any other kind of spell.

This is why, in canon at least, they must be cast with hatred. That's a great safety valve for getting rid of accidental murders.

(I also suspect you mean descendants, not ancestors.)

Comment author: wedrifid 28 October 2010 06:12:53AM *  7 points [-]

This is why, in canon at least, they must be cast with hatred. That's a great safety valve for getting rid of accidental murders.

I think I'd prefer the safety valve working the other way. "Let's limit it only to the people most likely to abuse it" sounds like a dubious tactic. Although come to think of it it is a rather good analogue to elements of standard morality (with respect to power and status).

Comment author: Vaniver 28 October 2010 10:50:42PM 1 point [-]

I think I'd prefer the safety valve working the other way.

I agree that a safety valve that makes sure only Good Guys (who?) kill Bad Guys (who?) would be more morally valuable. But if you're doing that you might as well program moral laws into the universe itself, so it is impossible to lie, steal, or murder.

This is a technically feasible (but this is magic we're talking about) hack which makes it more difficult to mistakenly murder or torture people with magic.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 27 October 2010 06:17:22PM *  3 points [-]

A few thoughts, just to go on record with them. As always, apologies if I'm repeating well-covered ground; I have not read all the comments on this thread, nor am I likely to. I would appreciate pointers to comments I ought to read, though.

Polyjuice, Bahry would have called it, if he'd thought that anyone could possibly do magic that delicate from inside someone else's body

OTOH, the same person is described in ch52 as

the... man Professor Quirrell had Polyjuiced into.

It's unclear whose voice that is in, but the same sentence describes the voice as "unfamiliar," which suggests we're getting Harry's POV rather than Word Of God. So Harry believes Quirrell Polyjuiced into this man.

So either: A. Harry is right, and Bahry is mistaken about what's possible while Polyjuiced. B. Bahry is right, and Harry is mistaken about what happened. C. They're both right, and something weird is happening. (E.g., Harry's companion is not actually doing magic as delicate as he appears to be doing, or some such thing.)

B seems most plausible to me, as Bahry ought to know about such things. The simplest explanation is that he isn't Polyjuiced at all -- the "sallow lanky bearded man" with the "low and gravelly" voice is Harry's companion's natural form. (Of course, there might be other means of changing his appearance that we've never heard of before, but that would be a cheap narrative trick.)

Which suggests he is not and never was the actual Quirrell. And also that he is not and never was anyone Harry would recognize (from pictures, from extrapolation in mirrors, etc.)

Professor Quirrell had pointed out that there was no plausible reason for him to be possessed by the shade of He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.

So either: A. There is in fact no plausible reason for this. B. There is a plausible reason, but neither Quirrell nor Harry can think of one. C. There is a plausible reason, but Harry can't think of one, and Quirrell is pretending not to be able to think of one.

The most likely of those given the data I'm aware of is A. Which suggests that Professor Quirrell is not and never was possessed by Voldemort (ETA: er, I mean, by the shade of He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named).

Which is not to say that Harry's companion isn't or wasn't.

Comment author: jimrandomh 27 October 2010 08:00:39PM 5 points [-]

The fact that Quirrel sometimes reverts to zombie mode suggests that Voldemort is teleoperating that body. Perhaps he has more than one body for that purpose, and simply used a different body for the breakin, rather than polyjuicing the first one. It would be odd that both bodies could assume snake-form, but I see no reason in principle why that magic wouldn't be transferrable.

If that's what happened, then the Quirrel body might still be alive somewhere. Voldemort might be alive (in which case he would return to Quirrel's body, and pin the blame on Harry), or temporarily dead, in which case Quirrel's vacant body might turn up somewhere.

Comment author: Unnamed 28 October 2010 08:08:38PM 3 points [-]

This is plausible, and fits with my speculation that Quirrell's been Dementor-kissed.

On the other hand, Harry still feels a sense of doom when Quirrell is in zombie mode, which suggests that Voldemort isn't completely gone then.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 28 October 2010 03:25:11PM 2 points [-]

Re: Voldemort teleoperating Quirrell... if there's a quick summary somewhere of why this is a plausible explanation for Q's occasional zombie mode, I'd love a pointer.

Re: remote-snakeform... if that's what's going on, it would be better writing to introduce the possibility of remote animagusing somewhere along the line. Lacking any such introduction (or have I just missed it?) it seems a far simpler explanation that Harry's current companion and Harry's DODA instructor share a body, and that body is a snake animagus. (cf hooves, horses, zebras)

Comment author: thomblake 27 October 2010 06:40:13PM 4 points [-]

Yeah, I think the naive reading is that the narration is from Harry's POV, and Quirrell Polyjuiced into the man (as planned), and Quirrell is such a badass that he can do whatever magic he wants while polyjuiced, which is unusual enough for Bahry not to expect it.

And Quirrell claiming there's no plausible reason to think he's possessed by Voldemort is just him thumbing his nose at the reader (aside from the usual misdirection).

Comment author: TheOtherDave 27 October 2010 06:53:50PM *  1 point [-]

ch53

(Harry had asked why Professor Quirrell couldn't be the one to play the part of the Dark Lord, and Professor Quirrell had pointed out that there was no plausible reason for him to be possessed by the shade of He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.)

Also... why in the world is Harry using the labels "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" and "Dark Lord" in his thinking, rather than "Voldemort"? Ditto Quirrell. It seems pointlessly imprecise.

We've established that there can be multiple Dark Lords, maybe even at the same time, and I see no clear reason to believe there's only been one in the last century. And one can manufacture "He Who Must Not Be Named"s to one's heart's content. Is this deliberate, either on the author's part or (bizarrely) the characters'?

[edit: oops. I'm a doof; thomblake points to the relevant cite below. (Thanks thomblake!) Which now makes me really wonder whether there's a massive piece of misdirection going on along the lines of what I reference below.

What I ought to do is go back through the fic and see who says what about the-presumed-to-be-singular-entity variously referred to as "Dark Lord," "He Who Must Not Be Named," "Voldemort", "Tom Riddle", etc. and decide what I believe about that entity's singularity.

Well, no. What I ought to do is get back to work. Here I go...)

Now that I think about it, this would be a decidedly clever strategy for a mastermind in the HPverse has to adopt.

That is, suppose I establish the "He Who Must Not Be Named" convention and then order a trusted (male) lieutenant to do something, and order everyone never to call him by name, on pain of death.

Now, "He Who Must Not Be Named" is doing that thing, while I am doing something else (say, establishing an alibi).

There's a term for the fallacy this takes advantage of, where I confuse myself by forgetting that the referent for a label like "the President of the United States" can change between uses; I've forgotten what it is.

Of course, this wouldn't work with any forensic technique that actually involved interacting with objects in the world outside one's mind.

But magic in the HP-verse (and, really, magic in fiction more generally) is so bizarrely inconsistent about when it's interacting with objects and when it's interacting with labels that it might be worthwhile.

Comment author: thomblake 27 October 2010 07:05:25PM 5 points [-]

Also... why in the world is Harry using the labels "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named" and "Dark Lord" in his thinking, rather than "Voldemort"? Ditto Quirrell. It seems pointlessly imprecise.

In canon, using Voldemort's name was highly discouraged. Also:

Chapter 3:

"Voldemort?" Harry whispered. It should have been funny, but it wasn't. The name burned with a cold feeling, ruthlessness, diamond clarity, a hammer of pure titanium descending upon an anvil of yielding flesh. A chill swept over Harry even as he pronounced the word, and he resolved then and there to use safer terms like You-Know-Who.

Comment author: TobyBartels 28 October 2010 02:48:38AM 1 point [-]

We've established that there can be multiple Dark Lords, maybe even at the same time, and I see no clear reason to believe there's only been one in the last century.

In fact, there have been at least two Dark Lords in this (the 20th) century, since Grindelwald (defeated 1945) was also a Dark Lord. (But in canon, he is still alive at this time and imprisoned, although in Nurmengard rather than in Azkaban.)

Comment author: knb 27 October 2010 06:58:46AM 3 points [-]

Re: 54:

Harry can still salvage the situation somewhat, if I understand the ending. They're going to know Bella escaped, but Harry can still put Quirrel in his pouch (since he's in snake form) and hide with Bella under the invisibility cloak, right? Or can Aurors see through the cloak in HP:MOR? I think in canon nobody can penetrate the Cloak's invisibility.

Comment author: pjeby 28 October 2010 03:41:15AM *  2 points [-]

Harry can still put Quirrel in his pouch (since he's in snake form)

They can't touch each other, so no. Quirrel also obviously knows this, because his pre-mission prep was carefully designed to avoid them touching each other or casting any spells on each other, vs. easier ways to accomplish the same tasks.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 28 October 2010 03:46:37AM 1 point [-]

In canon there are ways to penetrate it. Mad-Eye Moody's magic eye can see through it.

Comment author: DaveX 27 October 2010 01:45:38PM 1 point [-]

Auror Bahry threatened some "area effect curses" and "anti-disillusionment" charms, so they seem to have some effective methods if they suspect invisible adversaries.

Comment author: PeterS 27 October 2010 07:11:56AM 3 points [-]

Moody's eye can see through the Invisibility Cloak.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 28 October 2010 12:30:10AM 8 points [-]

One of the systematic changes in MoR is that things which are sufficiently powerful are artifacts, and things which are artifacts are sufficiently powerful: The Marauder's Map was originally devised by Slytherin as part of the creation of Hogwarts and only slightly twisted by the Marauders (Ch. 25), and the Cloak of Invisibility is now in a class of its own compared to standard invisibility cloaks or Disillusionment (Ch. 54).

Rowling, of course, wrote that thing with Moody's eye before she decided the Cloak of Invisibility was a major artifact. So if Moody's eye can still see through it in MoR, it's going to be because either Moody's eye is also a major artifact, or, more likely, a specialized artifact devoted to seeing through invisibility (a specialized, specific artifact can defeat a generally more powerful artifact if the specialization is narrow enough).

Comment author: PeterS 28 October 2010 03:25:35AM 7 points [-]

Wow... I had imagined that Moody lost his eye in a fight or something -- but it would be way more awesome if he cut it out intentionally, to replace it with an eye more suited for the hunt.

Comment author: [deleted] 29 October 2010 12:21:56PM 3 points [-]

The idea of Moody as a voluntarily enhanced magical cyborg is awesome indeed.

In fact, the entire notion of human enhancement using magic would be an interesting theme to explore. It's already been done to some degree with the idea of defeating death and Harry making a mental note to research mind-altering spells in chapter 12 (intelligence explosion?), but things like Moody's eye and Wormtail's hand (which was strong enough to crush stones) show that there are also ways for Wizards to improve their abilities by replacing body parts with magical counterparts. Seeing what the wizarding world and/or Harry think of such ideas would be pretty interesting.

Comment author: gwern 28 October 2010 02:29:56PM 1 point [-]

And very Odin-esque.

Comment author: TobyBartels 28 October 2010 02:39:48AM 3 points [-]

the Cloak of Invisibility is now in a class of its own compared to standard invisibility cloaks or Disillusionment

As you already know, this is already true in canon; it's just that, as you say, it took Rowling a while to decide this.

I do like that you gave the Map such a great pedigree; it really was too powerful for a few students to make on their own.

Comment author: cousin_it 26 October 2010 12:31:13PM *  13 points [-]

Chapter 54: why don't Harry and Quirrell cast Somnium on Bellatrix instead of deceiving her? (The deception requires Quirrell to tell Harry the Death Eater password, among other things...) Why does Quirrell talk to Bahry so confidently while Bellatrix can hear him? Why does he follow his whims to play-duel and then kill Bahry instead of quickly subduing and memory-charming him, if they planned to pull off the perfect crime? Why is he so vulnerable to Dementors that he drops immediately when Harry's Patronus vanishes, even though Bahry's Patronus is still there successfully protecting Bahry and Harry? (Or am I misunderstanding the reason for his screaming? It's very similar to Harry's screaming when he first encountered a Dementor. If the screaming were caused by Quirrell's spell coming in contact with Harry's - brother wands or whatever - then Harry should've felt a symmetrical effect, which he didn't.)

Also, am I the only one stupid enough to only now realize that the professor's name is Quivering Squirrel?

Comment author: TobyBartels 28 October 2010 02:30:10AM 2 points [-]

Also, am I the only one stupid enough to only now realize that the professor's name is Quivering Squirrel?

Sorry, how does ‘Quirinu‑’ become ‘Quivering’?

Comment author: dclayh 28 October 2010 05:17:34AM 1 point [-]

Why does he follow his whims to play-duel and then kill Bahry instead of quickly subduing and memory-charming him,

Presumably, as I mentioned below, for the stated reason that "'It's been quite a while since I had a serious fight with a serious opponent'" As Quirrel himself said earlier, if you can't have some fun once in a while, what's the point?

Comment author: PhilGoetz 27 October 2010 02:47:21AM 3 points [-]

How about: Should Harry have trusted Quirrell? I don't mean "did it have a good outcome"; I mean, was Harry's trust justified by what he knew? Would you have done the same thing?

In retrospect, I think Harry ought to have said, "Professor Quirrell, I owe you a great debt, and have great respect for you. If you ask me to do something, I'll probably do it. But I don't trust you one single bit." But I doubt I would have said that myself.

Comment author: Danylo 26 October 2010 06:15:16PM 12 points [-]

why don't Harry and Quirrell cast Somnium on Bellatrix instead of deceiving her? (The deception requires Quirrell to tell Harry the Death Eater password, among other things...) Why does Quirrell talk to Bahry so confidently while Bellatrix can hear him? Why does he follow his whims to play-duel and then kill Bahry instead of quickly subduing and memory-charming him, if they planned to pull off the perfect crime?

That reminds me of something else Quirrell arranged for Harry -- occlumency. If they read Bella's and the Auror's mind, they'll see Harry as a villain, and since Harry has training in occlumency, he's no way to prove them wrong. The entire thing looks like a set-up.

Comment author: DanArmak 26 October 2010 08:53:06PM 3 points [-]

Harry didn't even consciously try to stop Quirrel's killing curse. It was an accident. Quirrel couldn't have counted on it happening to set Harry up.

Comment author: Danylo 27 October 2010 01:53:36AM *  4 points [-]

Oh, you're quite right. Perhaps Quirrel was planning to kill the Auror to make it clear that a break-out had occurred? That way, a full check of the prison would occur and Bella's replacement would likely be found. Which in turn would mean that it was put there simply to deceive Harry into a false sense of security. When the break in is made public, Dumbledore would naturally come under suspicion (since a Dementor disappeared under his watch) and he would suspect Harry. That might also explain the lack of the 30th charm by Quirrel. Might make Harry traceable.

I could be completely wrong, of course. Pure speculation.

Comment author: Unnamed 26 October 2010 07:00:14PM 2 points [-]

The Auror saw Quirrell fight him with amazing skill, attempt the killing curse, and turn into a snake. Harry saved him from the killing curse. Quirrell's the clear bad guy from his point of view (is that enough evidence for people to conclude that Q=V?), and only Harry's last Somnium spoils his innocence.

It will also be clear that they were lying to Bella, at least about some important things, since it was Harry's Patronus.

Comment author: NihilCredo 26 October 2010 07:13:18PM *  5 points [-]

I'm pretty sure I'm being exceedingly careful here, but...

is that enough evidence for people to conclude that Q=V?

It's enough evidence to conclude that he's a bad guy.

Assuming I had never read Eliezer's assurances that Q=V, I would most definitely not put it past him to make his rewriting of HP not so much about the Dumbleharry vs. Voldemort war, but about the internecine fight between Quirrell/ColdHarry and Dumbledore/WarmHarry about how to confront the Voldemort threat - by finding a worthy dictator (in the original intent of the word, hopefully) or by making free citizens, I mean subjects of Her Majesty stand up for themselves. Each of them convinced that fighting Voldemort by the other's means would be as bad or worse than giving up; each of them wondering how much can they scheme and sacrifice, how close can they come to Voldemort's methods in order to successfully lead the fight against him... damn, speculating about it makes me want to read it already, no matter all the stuff that doesn't quite work with this scenario (sense of doom in primis).

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 28 October 2010 12:17:57AM 5 points [-]

So write it. Nothing wrong with having an AU of an AU.

Comment author: Unnamed 26 October 2010 08:44:54PM 4 points [-]

I mean: Is it enough evidence for people within the story to conclude that he is Voldemort? Being a ridiculously powerful dark wizard should be enough for them to locate the hypothesis and consider it a possibility, at least for those who know that Voldemort is alive. Then there are other clues: his attempt (with Harry) to free Bellatrix Black, knowledge of the Death Eater password (among him & Harry), his strange relationship with Harry Potter (including the odd magical interaction & Harry's sense of doom), and his ability to turn into a snake. Is that enough evidence to convince someone like Dumbledore who already knows that the Dark Lord lives? Is it enough for the rest of the wizarding world to be persuaded?

Comment author: DanArmak 26 October 2010 08:51:50PM *  1 point [-]

Why is he so vulnerable to Dementors that he drops immediately when Harry's Patronus vanishes, even though Bahry's Patronus is still there successfully protecting Bahry and Harry? (Or am I misunderstanding the reason for his screaming? It's very similar to Harry's screaming when he first encountered a Dementor. If the screaming were caused by Quirrell's spell coming in contact with Harry's - brother wands or whatever - then Harry should've felt a symmetrical effect, which he didn't.)

It was caused by the spell contact. Harry was also screaming (Bahry's POV mentions hearing this). He was probably less affected than Quirrel because he was much farther away.

Case in point: Quirrel had spent about a minute in Azkaban (top floor) without any Patronus, until Harry arrived, and all that happened was that he had to lean on the wall for a bit to recover.

Comment author: cousin_it 26 October 2010 09:14:28PM *  3 points [-]

Naw, Quirrell spent that minute in his snake form because it's less vulnerable to Dementors, and when disaster struck he threw away his wand (recall how Harry got attacked through his wand) and assumed snake form again, probably as a last ditch defense. So I'm not sure if your final point supports your conclusion or mine.

And Harry was probably screaming just because he was scared.

ETA: I just realized another funny thing. As Quirrell is an unregistered Animagus and Bahry saw him transform, in the aftermath he'll be going to Azkaban for two years unless something unusual happens.

Comment author: katydee 27 October 2010 06:59:51AM 4 points [-]

I have very little, if any, idea of what something "usual" would look like under these circumstances.

Comment author: EchoingHorror 27 October 2010 06:33:45AM 4 points [-]

Polyjuiced Quirrell, mind you.

Comment author: jsalvatier 26 October 2010 05:05:29PM 1 point [-]

I didn't realize it until you mentioned it.

Comment author: jimrandomh 26 October 2010 01:02:31PM *  11 points [-]

I noticed something odd in chapter 17, which seems relevant:

Harry was rather confused. "But this could be important, yesterday I got this sudden sense of doom when -"

"Mr. Potter! I have a sense of doom as well! And my sense of doom is suggesting that you must not finish that sentence!" ... "This isn't like you!" Harry burst out. "I'm sorry but that just seems unbelievably irresponsible! From what I've heard there's some kind of jinx on the Defense position, and if you already know something's going to go wrong, I'd think you'd all be on your toes -" ... "I see," Harry said slowly, taking it all in. "So in other words, whatever's wrong with Professor Quirrell, you desperately don't want to know about it until the end of the school year. And since it's currently September, he could assassinate the Prime Minister on live television and get away with it so far as you're concerned."

Professor McGonagall gazed at him unblinkingly. "I am certain that I could never be heard endorsing such a statement, Mr. Potter. At Hogwarts we strive to be proactive with respect to anything that threatens the educational attainment of our students." ... "Oh, I doubt that, Mr. Potter. I doubt that very much." Professor McGonagall leaned forward, her face tightening again. "Since you and I have already discussed matters far more sensitive than these, I shall speak frankly. You, and you alone, have reported this mysterious sense of doom. You, and you alone, are a chaos magnet the likes of which I have never seen. After our little shopping trip to Diagon Alley, and then the Sorting Hat, and then today's little episode, I can well foresee that I am fated to sit in the Headmaster's office and hear some hilarious tale about Professor Quirrell in which you and you alone play a starring role, after which there will be no choice but to fire him. I am already resigned to it, Mr. Potter. And if this sad event takes place any earlier than the Ides of May, I will string you up by the gates of Hogwarts with your own intestines and pour fire beetles into your nose. Now do you understand me completely?"

As Harry observes, this exchange is extremely out of character for McGonagall. Telling Harry not to voice his concerns about Quirrel, I could believe; but cutting him off mid-sentence, and them making such a graphic, violent threat if he does, I can not. It is so out of character, in fact, that I think it must be a symptom of being Imperiused.

We know that Voldemort used to use Imperius quite a bit, and the only real reasons he might stop would be if someone figured out how to detect it (which hasn't happened), or if his new form didn't have the power. One Imperiused person rules out the second possibility, so if if Quirrelmort put an imperius on McGonagall, he has almost certainly used it elsewhere too.

Which brings us to Harry's attempted breakout of Bellatrix. Breaking in to Azkaban to rescue Bellatrix Black, I could just barely believe. Pretending to be Voldemort while doing so, however, pushes credibility too far. From Chapter 52 to Chapter 54, Harry is Imperiused. There are just too many things stupid and suspicious about the plan to believe that Harry overlooked all of them.

And that brings us to the question of what Imperius actually does. And this, I think, explains the chapter title, "The Stanford Prison Experiment", which otherwise seems not to fit at all. The conclusion of that famous experiment was that if you give someone a role - even a fake role, like a prison guard over subjects in a psychology experiment who are technically free to leave - then they adopt it as part of their identity, including the evil parts, and become blind to the wrong things they do as part of that identity. So perhaps that's what Imperius does: it assigns its target a particular role, which their mind will bend to accommodate. That would also explain why the title was redacted for part 1, which takes place before the Imperius curse was cast.

Here are some abnormalities in Harry's mind:

This was it, this was the day and the moment when Harry started acting the part.

And in another part of him, like he was just letting another part of his mind carry out a habit without paying much attention to it...

Professor Quirrell had instructed Harry, calmly and precisely, how he was to act in Bellatrix's presence; how to form the pretense he would maintain in his mind.

The only problem with this theory, is that Harry believes that Quirrel can never use magic on him. His Patronus and Quirrel's Aveda Kevadera certainly didn't interact well, and there seems to be an issue if they touch. But the theory that they can never use magic on each other, seems to have appeared from nowhere; there is no evidence for it whatsoever, except the sense of doom. Perhaps that idea was planted, to make the idea that Harry was Imperiused seem less plausible?

Comment author: Mercy 26 October 2010 02:48:12PM *  12 points [-]

And, sorry this has probably been gone over before, but why doesn't Harry think about the sense of doom all that much? He keeps glossing over it as if he's under a Somebody Else's Problem type field. If he's under some sort of mental power it's likely causing both mistakes

Comment author: DaveX 26 October 2010 06:43:57PM *  3 points [-]

I think the title was redacted in order to not give the game away too early, as in Chapter 9.

Maybe the magical incompatibility is real, and perhaps the dark social engineering behind the Stanford Prison Experiment relates to Chapter 16, Lateral Thinking. In Ch16, there's almost the same words in all-caps dizzying his brain. It might be explained by the sense of doom and magical incompatibility. Also Ch16 has “Mr. Potter, I never said you were to kill. There is a time and a place for taking your enemy alive,..." If Quirrell senses similar doom on his side, framing Harry as the Dark Lord and almost capable of breaking his most trusted lieutenant out of Azkaban might be a cunning lateral-thinking plot to dispose of all but a fragment of his nemesis without using anything direct.

Comment author: Unnamed 25 October 2010 07:00:31PM *  15 points [-]

chp 51-54 & A/N

Is it plausible that Harry would go along with this rescue? It is harder to accept than a Sirius rescue, which would've been based on the belief that Sirius was actually innocent (he hadn't done the awful things he was convicted of). The extenuating circumstance of having become evil under the influence of the Dark Lord provides a much weaker reason to rescue someone, and requires much more trust in the person who is conveying the information (since they must not only get the facts right, but make some subtle and complex judgments about the prisoner's character and what they deserve).

If Quirrell had just come straight out and asked Harry to help him break Bellatrix Black out of Azkaban, and to pretend to be Voldemort while doing it so that she would follow him out, I don't think he would have done it. Far too many red flags. Sure, Harry wants to end Azkaban, but to start with Bellatrix, who undeniably did so many evil things? Quirrell's case in favor of Bellatrix's innocence sounds like what a partisan would say when trying to make their side seem favorable, not an argument that Harry would buy (just as he could see through Draco's case against Dumbledore). Genre savvy Harry has read plenty of stories about villains with a sympathetic backstory.

Harry knows that Dumbledore doesn't trust Quirrell, he can imagine how Hermione would react to this (and she was right about transfiguration experimentation), or how Neville would react (Neville, who said with his voice shaking that torturing his parents was "not even close to the worst thing she's ever done").

Or even how Draco would react: Bellatrix Black? She was one of the few who were truly evil (chp 47). Forget that nonsense about wanting to save a poor innocent person from the nasty Dementors (you really think that's why Quirrell wants to break someone out of Azkaban?), this is obviously part of a plot. As Father would ask, who benefits? What kind of plot would involve breaking Bellatrix Black out of Azkaban?

But Quirrell didn't just come right out and suggest that they go free Bellatrix from Azkaban, he gradually and artfully got Harry to buy into the plot. So if we're going to wonder whether it's plausible for Harry to go along with it, we'll have to look at how Quirrell manipulated him into agreeing, and why Harry fell for the manipulations and wasn't stopped by these red flags.

Comment author: DanArmak 26 October 2010 08:42:10AM 5 points [-]

The extenuating circumstance of having become evil under the influence of the Dark Lord provides a much weaker reason to rescue someone, and requires much more trust in the person who is conveying the information (since they must not only get the facts right, but make some subtle and complex judgments about the prisoner's character and what they deserve).

If Harry is a utilitarian, he shouldn't need extenuating circumstances. He should want to free everyone from Azkaban and from all forms of torture and suffering, including truly evil people. The only reason not to free Bellatrix Black should be the danger of her attacking other people later on, and that's the point on which he should seek reassurance from Quirrel (re: what they are going to do with her once freed).

But it seems Harry reverts to common human morals in the last few chapters. He attaches much weight to Bella's innocence. He thinks he'd like to kill Voldemoret as revenge or punishment.

Comment author: Document 28 October 2010 08:07:40PM *  5 points [-]

The only reason not to free Bellatrix Black should be the danger of her attacking other people later on, and that's the point on which he should seek reassurance from Quirrel (re: what they are going to do with her once freed).

Another reason is that (as pointed out elsewhere) there could be other people much more deserving of being freed; freeing Bellatrix or freeing her first might cost him the opportunity of freeing any of them in the near future.

Comment author: whpearson 28 October 2010 08:46:35PM 6 points [-]

And failing to free her at all may cost him the opportunity to save the world. Harry should have had some doubts as to whether he was ready for the mission.

Failing that, the other thing that has been bothering me for a while is why did Quirrel take Harry to save Bellatrix now? If Quirrel was pure Voldy he wouldn't care about Bellatrix, he doesn't love her. Saving her now, by taking a young idealistic boy on an important high-stress mission, doesn't seem like a good plan. How much does an evil overlord value saving henchwomen, what risk is worth it?

I am not sure that Quirrel is pure Voldy. I'm half tempted to predict that Quirrel is Harry-grown-old-and-dark transported through time in some fashion. Hence the extreme inability to touch each other and the fact that Quirrel's priors are too good. There is a fair amount of evidence against that (lack of patronus, for one). But it is a fun idea.

Comment author: bisserlis 29 October 2010 08:35:06AM *  3 points [-]

Wait, can you explain why lacking a patronus is evidence against Quirrel being a time-traveling Harry? He would have the same super-bright human patronus that Harry does, which would be a bit of a tip that he was Harry-from-the-future. So obviously he would pretend to not have one.

Comment author: Sniffnoy 29 October 2010 08:59:22PM *  2 points [-]

Alternative idea: You only get one patronus. Harry's got hit by AK, so now he can't cast patronus anymore.

Comment author: bisserlis 29 October 2010 10:03:33PM 3 points [-]

Shhh, if you're not careful, patronuses will be sentient next. Is it ethical to dismiss a sentient patronus?

Comment author: whpearson 29 October 2010 02:22:02PM 1 point [-]

If he had a patronus he could have saved Bellatrix a long time ago, by himself or using a more reliable ally than Harry. He seemed to have been waiting for Harry, thus either he doesn't have a patronus or he needed Harry to do this task for some other unknown reason.

Comment author: bisserlis 29 October 2010 07:26:04PM 1 point [-]

I'm still confused. I think because I assume that saving Bellatrix was definitely not the point of the trip, and whatever the real point was, it specifically has to do with Harry so Quirrel's patronus status is irrelevant with respect to the Azkaban trip. Couldn't Quirrel always have used an ally in the plot? They wouldn't even necessarily have to be willing or reliable on their own, or can't you summon a patronus under the imperius curse?

Now I feel like I did when reading the chapter on the final army battle. I think I'm an n-1 player.

Comment author: whpearson 29 October 2010 08:50:36PM *  2 points [-]

I got the impression that Harry's patronus was special and strong for shielding against the Dementors, perhaps no others would have been strong enough to hide an escaped felon? Why hadn't more people been broken out?

Okay if saving Bellatrix is not about saving Bellatrix, could whatever it was about have been done in a more controlled environment? Could Quirrell have hired some goons to play a part in some formative point of Harry's education/ensnarement rather than taking a teen into a live fire situation.

What would have happened if Harry hadn't been able to cast Patronus? Could Quirrell have taught the lesson/ got a hold on Harry in a different way? If so why hadn't Quirrell got this hold as soon as he could have? It seemed that Harry's Patronus was the trigger for the Azkaban mission (Quirrell suggests it just after he finds out about it, why does Quirrell need to get the hold now).

The only explanation that makes sense in the "azkaban is not about bellatrix" scenario is that Quirrell wanted it to fail all along... I see insufficient incentive for Quirrell for the positive outcome to offset the severe risk of it going wrong.

I'm also confused. None of the explanations for what is going on make sense. Quirrell's motivation/identity seems the most under explained.

Comment author: bisserlis 29 October 2010 09:57:35PM 1 point [-]

Interesting. I'm not sure whether or not it's better at shielding, because we're told that people break in to Azkaban to shield the inmates so that they might have regular non-nightmare dreams, or just a half-day of patronus time. So we know that just one typical patronus is strong enough to protect people from the worst effects of a Dementor for 12 hours.

I don't think we know enough about the defenses of Azkaban to say at what point the typical rescue operation would fail. But when we're witnessing the aurors in the command center, I find it interesting that only attempts to relieve the pain of being in Azkaban through patronus-presence are brought up (in the bit about bribes), not escape attempts. Perhaps it has to do with the "perfect crime" logic.

As to what the actual purpose was in this whole excursion, I have no idea.

I'm not sure intentional failure is the only explanation. It could be some weird bonding experience. Maybe Quirrel always dreamed of raiding wizarding prisons, pulling off bank heists, and taking over the world with his son. Chapter 55: "Adoption Papers"

I think from the duel that we can infer that Quirrel didn't expect to lose, even in a one-sided fight against a team of aurors. He was just playing games when it was one-on-one. Maybe he used the killing curse because he was (overly) confident that Harry was committed to trusting him completely with regards to this mission and didn't expect to be blocked.

Maybe chapter 55 will answer all of our questions. Ha. Haha.

Comment author: Vaniver 28 October 2010 10:41:32PM 7 points [-]

Saving her now, by taking a young idealistic boy on an important high-stress mission, doesn't seem like a good plan.

Unless the primary purpose is to change Harry. Duping Harry into rescuing Bellatrix Black creates some pretty hefty blackmail- most importantly by Harry against himself. Harry can name the fallacies involved, but that's no guarantee he can overcome them.

Remember, pretty much every action Quirrel has taken so far has been pedagogical. It seems far more likely that he's grooming Harry than that he's rebuilding his power base.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 28 October 2010 09:10:33PM 5 points [-]

If it did turn out to be that I'd be annoyed since a) old Harry time traveling back has been done before and b) it would be such a stretch from the standard plot that making it turn out that way would strike me as too far removed from the original.

Comment author: whpearson 29 October 2010 02:37:39PM 2 points [-]

I think it could make a decent story. I'm not sure that it hasn't strayed too far from canon anyway.

Sngr/Fgnl Cbggre

Nsgre guvf qronpyr, Uneel trgf pncgherq naq chg va Nmxunona sbe n ovg. Ur ybfrf nyy uvf unccl zrzbevrf naq gur novyvgl gb pnfg Cngebahf (vg vf n unccl zrzbel) naq fbzr bs uvf engvbanyvgl genvavat. Ur rira sbetrgf ur vf Uneel Cbggre (ur yvxrq orvat n obl jvgu qrfgval).

Urzvbar/Dhveery/Qenpb naq gur jrnfyrlf zbhag n erfphr, jvgu Urezvbar univat yrneag cngebahf sebz Uneel'f abgr.

Uneel vf nffhzrq gb or gur qnex ybeq, ol gur nhgubevgvrf, fb vf abg fnsr ng guvf gvzr, ur jbhyq or uhagrq qbja, fb vf genafcbegrq onpx va gvzr.

Gurer ur xvyyf bss Ibyqrzbeg cebcre naq fybjyl orpbzrf Dhveery. Guvf nyfb rkcynvaf jul gur Qrzragbef unir n orrs jvgu Dhveery, ur unf gur znex bs fbzrbar jub rfpncrq Nmxnona.

Dhveery unf gb pbnpu Uneel va guvf jnl gb sbez n fgnoyr gvzr ybbc.

Abj V qba'g ernyyl guvax vg vf guvf. Ohg fgvyy vg jencf hc n ahzore bs fgenaqf. V nyfb unira'g ernq rabhtu snasvp be gur ynfg srj obbxf bs Uneel Cbggre fb zl frafr bs jung unf orra qbar be fubhyq or qbar vf abg irel fgebat.

Comment author: thomblake 29 October 2010 03:29:27PM *  1 point [-]

Guvf nyfb rkcynvaf jul gur Qrzragbef unir n orrs jvgu Dhveery, ur unf gur znex bs fbzrbar jub rfpncrq Nmxnona.

I believe that the Dementors have a beef with Quirrell because (rot13) gur Qrzragbef ner Qrngu vapneangr naq Dhveeryy qrsvrq qrngu ol perngvat n ubepehk, abg gb zragvba qlvat naq abg fgnlvat qrnq. Gurl jnag gur cevmr gung'f orra qravrq gurz.

Comment author: whpearson 29 October 2010 08:10:35PM 2 points [-]

Reading some wikis tell me that Dementors didn't have a problem with Voldy in canon, and that condition applies there. So either that is a deviation from canon, due to a change in the nature of Dementors or something else is going on.

Comment author: [deleted] 29 October 2010 08:33:09PM *  3 points [-]

The Dementors don't represent death in Rowling's canon. They are identified with depression.

Comment author: bogus 29 October 2010 09:26:46PM *  2 points [-]

Potential spoiler:

Vg pbhyq or gung Uneel vf fvzcyl zvfgnxra nobhg gur gehr angher bs Qrzragbef: Gurl qb abg ercerfrag Qrngu (gung vf Yrguvsbyqf), ohg engure zntvpnyyl pbapragengrq rkvfgragvny natfg (spoiler). Uneel'f gubhtug va gur Uhznavfz frdhrapr vf uvf guvat gb cebgrpg (spoiler), juvpu (jura uryq fgebatyl) vf n engvbany pbhagre gb rkvfgragvny natfg. Navznyf ner rssrpgvir Cngebav orpnhfr gurl'er abg ersyrpgvir rabhtu gb srry rkvfgragvny natfg.

Gur ovttrfg ceboyrz jvgu guvf gurbel vf gung Oryyngevk qbrf unir "fbzrguvat gb cebgrpg"--ure vagrafr ybir sbe Ibyql. Guvf gubhtug fubhyq unir rvgure fuvryqrq ure sebz gur vasyhrapr bs Qrzragbef be orra sbetbggra nf cneg bs gur Qrzragbef' trareny rssrpg.

Fbzrguvat gb guvax nobhg sbe n zber pnabavpny fcvabss, gubhtu.

Nfvqr: Sha naq rkpvgrzrag jbhyq nyfb jbex nf rssrpgvir pbhagref gb rkvfgragvny natfg. Cerqvpgvba: Serq naq Trbetr Jrnfyrl jvyy qrirybc na rira zber rssrpgvir Cngebahf ol erqvfpbirevat fbzr bs gur 31 ynjf bs Sha (spoiler).

Comment author: Sniffnoy 29 October 2010 08:33:51PM 2 points [-]

Yes, in canon he eventually recruited the Dementors, IIRC. This seems like a change in the nature of the Dementors.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 29 October 2010 02:58:15PM *  1 point [-]

I think the general issue is that the overarching setting is essentially the same or very close to the original even if the details have changed. That's an implicit pact that Eliezer has essentially made with the readers.

For what it is worth, prior to the end of the series there was a fair bit speculation that either Voldemort or Dumbledore was really a time traveling Harry (this speculation seemed most prominent after book 4 before book 5 came out).

At a general meta-level I also doubt Eliezer will do anything like this because this is still to a large extent Eliezer's vehicle for trying to illustrate concepts about rationality and that sort of plot line would seriously distract from such a goal.

Comment author: gwern 29 October 2010 02:53:02PM 1 point [-]

Ah, but how does he kill Voldemort? Your scenario doesn't provide any power-up to go from irrational prisoner in Azkaban to Dark Lord-killer.

I suggest that before that, Harry remembers Quirrel's story about the Chamber of Secrets, and regretfully kills the basilisk as well (to keep the time-loop stable). Indeed, a time-loop might explain how Quirrel found about it in the first place - the search procedure was simply to systematically investigate every old legend, and the Chamber was simply the one that panned out.

Comment author: jimrandomh 28 October 2010 11:12:27PM *  3 points [-]

How much does an evil overlord value saving henchwomen, what risk is worth it?

Not worth it. But this is:

"Your wand," murmured Bellatrix, "I hid it in the graveyard, my lord, before I left... under the tombstone to the right of your father's grave...

Comment author: MartinB 28 October 2010 11:37:46PM 3 points [-]

Which would not requiring a rescue mission, but just going in & out. Which - as we learned - is rather cheap to do.

Comment author: MartinB 28 October 2010 10:47:38PM 2 points [-]

Quirrel seems to not know some theoretical concepts that Harry does know.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 28 October 2010 11:53:30PM 2 points [-]

There's also the TDT idea that people who did evil things should be punished.

Comment author: h-H 29 October 2010 12:18:52AM *  1 point [-]

yeah, punishing agents for doing 'bad things' as a deterrence against other agents acting similarly is quite rational.

Comment author: Perplexed 29 October 2010 12:32:50AM 2 points [-]

It is a lot more important than just deterring similar acts. A failure to punish after having made a commitment to punish removes a big part of the deterrent effectiveness of all kinds of punishment for all kinds of 'bad things'. For that matter, it may decrease trust that the government/society will keep its other commitments - pension obligations, for example.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 28 October 2010 02:39:37AM *  3 points [-]

People aren't very good at being utilitarians when there's heavy emotional issues involved even if they are generally good at thinking rationally in other situations. For example, I'm generally a utilitarian, but when I read about this extremely disturbing story I wanted the people responsible to suffer badly for a very long time. And I still do. I don't just want them to die to prevent future harm. I want them to burn. I want them to burn so much that it almost makes me wish there were a vengeful god to torture them. And if I had the choice between simply killing the people involved and making them die slow, agonizing deaths, I'd likely pick the second and them lie to myself and convince myself that that was somehow the utilitarian thing to do.

Humans have a lot of trouble being good utilitarians when the stakes are high.

Comment author: TobyBartels 28 October 2010 02:20:16AM 2 points [-]

he only reason not to free Bellatrix Black should be the danger of her attacking other people later on, and that's the point on which he should seek reassurance from Quirrel (re: what they are going to do with her once freed).

Even if Harry's not a utilitarian, I'd still like him to be smart enough to realise that this is still an important practical question to ask.

But he's only 11, so I only hope that EY will let him realise his mistake later.

Comment author: PeterS 25 October 2010 08:51:00PM *  21 points [-]

I think there's two things going on here. The first is that Harry is psychologically in fantasy-mode during these chapters, and the second is Harry's self-esteem issues regarding his own intelligence.

"You are about to invite me to join a secret organization full of interesting people like yourself," said Harry, "one of whose goals is to reform or overthrow the government of magical Britain, and yes, I'm in."

Fantasy-mode: Harry is being recruited by a secret group of highly interesting rebels. They fight against the stupid, evil, corrupt government of Magical Britain. Their cause and methods are righteous beyond question (otherwise Harry would ask a few, instead of immediately inducting himself).

Quirrell believes Magical Britain must be ruled under the dictatorship of a powerful leader, as we learned in chapters 34-35 (whereas Harry believes in democracy). So what kind of secret rebel organization is he likely to be a member of? It doesn't matter. Harry is in fantasy-mode -- he could be in a secret organization of interesting people whose goal it is to change the world!

Fantasy-mode is completely obvious throughout these chapters, especially at the start of 52.

Self-esteem issues: This thing with Quirrell being able to make "amazing deductions from scanty evidence" has been brought up before. Quirrell has also told him things like "You should have figured this out", "you're childish", and sometimes it even seems like Quirrell is testing Harry's intelligence. This is making Harry insecure, and even desperate now. He's thinking a week in advance of how he'll answer Quirrell's questions, rather than suffer the humility of having not already deduced and fully understood the secret plan by the time he was asked.

Quirrell is playing Harry on at least these levels: "save the world" fantasy, and "you are not as intelligent as I" subtle cues. These weaknesses of Harry are apparent in a lot of previous chapters. Since these are established vulnerabilities, it's plausible that Quirrell can successfully exploit them without Harry knowing.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 28 October 2010 06:03:58PM 7 points [-]

Fantasy-mode is completely obvious throughout these chapters, especially at the start of 52.

Yes.

Which also makes me remember the titles of these chapters.

I originally thought the title was suggesting that we were going to explore the underlying motives of the Aurors/Dementors/prisoners... but the SPE has very little to do with prisons, really, and a lot to do with the ways in which people's thinking and behavior gets distorted by the roles they adopt.

Much as Harry, as you point out, is distorting his own thinking by choosing the role of Noble Warrior in an Epic Fantasy.

Comment author: orthonormal 28 October 2010 11:14:52PM 1 point [-]

I originally thought the title was suggesting that we were going to explore the underlying motives of the Aurors/Dementors/prisoners... but the SPE has very little to do with prisons, really, and a lot to do with the ways in which people's thinking and behavior gets distorted by the roles they adopt.

IWICUTT.

("I wish I could upvote this twice" deserves a shorthand around here.)

Comment author: Unnamed 25 October 2010 07:47:50PM 21 points [-]

Quirrell gradually brought Harry into the plot, getting him to make a series of commitments so that by the time the full plot was revealed it would be hard for him to back out. The gradual escalation of commitment is reminiscent of the Milgram study, more than the Stanford prison experiment. Quirrell framed each step in general terms that would activate Harry's noble motivations for going through with the plot or undermine his defenses and objections at later steps. And Harry was rushed, so that he wouldn't have time to think things through fully on his own and analyze them from different angles, which made it much easier to lead Harry's thoughts down the path that Quirrell wanted.

In chp 49 Quirrell revealed his secret illegal animagus form, which seemed innocent enough - Quirrell had voluntarily disclosed it for no clear benefit, which made it hard to hold it against him. But in doing so, he brought Harry into a conspiracy, where they had secrets from the rest of the world which Harry was comfortable with even though they might look bad to other people. He got Harry to set aside the law as a standard for evaluating what was happening. Harry knew that the law is flawed, but he also should have recognized that rules are often there for a reason (like the transfiguration safety rules) and so the law is a useful heuristic which should only be ignored with extreme caution. Proclaiming his lack of respect for the law also made it hard for Harry to later ask himself "what would Hermione think about this?" since he'd already crossed boundaries that she wouldn't cross and it had seemed innocent enough.

At the start of their meeting in chp 51, Quirrell asked "do you trust me?" Harry considered and answered yes, since he trusted Quirrell on the whole, more than not. But trust should not be a binary yes/no question, but rather a question of how far and in what ways. Bringing a Dementor into Hogwarts was at the edge of how far Dumbledore would trust Quirrell, and Harry could have imagined what Dumbledore would think of the prison break, but at first the question was just "do you trust me?", not "do you trust me for this very suspicious-sounding plot" or "do you trust me over Dumbledore?" (plus, Quirrell had had some success at getting Harry to distrust Dumbledore). Establishing trust in general made it harder for Harry to doubt Quirrell about the most relevant particulars. If you're concerned that someone seems kind of Dark and has hidden motives, then it's not smart to trust them to have good reasons for freeing Bellatrix Black, no matter how intelligent & clear-thinking they are or how helpful they have been to you personally. But with trust established, Harry didn't think things through and connect those particular reasons for distrust to those particulars of what Quirrell was doing; he was willing to defer to Quirrell. Part of Harry's problem was a kind of Aumann failure - since he trusted Quirrell's rationality, he didn't reason everything through on his own, which made it easier for Quirrell to trick him. There's also the UFAI mistake where being impressed by someone's intelligence makes you think that they share your goals - exacerbated, in this case, by how much Harry identified with Quirrell.

Quirrell introduced the Azkaban breakout plot as a way to free some unspecified innocent person. Harry wants to end Azkaban, and framing the breakout in this way makes it seem like a smaller version of that, which can be based on the same noble motives that capture Harry's imagination (as we see at the start of chp 52). The sense of heroism makes Harry willing to take dramatic action - otherwise, he'd probably balk at something so extreme. In this heroic state of mind, and in a rush, Harry doesn't stop to consider that Quirrell's reasons for wanting to free Bellatrix probably aren't the same as Harry's reasons for wanting to end Azkaban or free innocents.

When Quirrell finally identifies Bellatrix as the target, is Harry really going to back out now? He'd break someone out of Azkaban, just not her? Sure, the case for Bellatrix's innocence seems a little sketchy, but if Quirrell says it's true then the details must fill out the argument convincingly - Quirrell can definitely think clearly about these things, and you trust him. And there's no time now to get all the information that you're missing and think it all through yourself. Sure, this would look bad to other people, or to the law, but this is a big dramatic heroic thing which is judged by a higher standard, which those other people don't understand. Even Hermione wouldn't understand what I want to do here.

So I can see how the versions of Hermione and Dumbledore that Harry has in his head could be neutralized. His inner Gryffindor is caught up in a heroic fervor about saving someone from the Dementors of Azkaban. His inner Ravenclaw is overawed by Quirrell's superior intellect and has been wasting its efforts trying to impress Quirrell by guessing what he'll say next. His inner Hufflepuff was shut down early in the process, and is being ignored by the time its warnings could seem most plausible to the rest of him. But what happened to his inner Slytherin, and the Draco inside his head? They, ironically, are the ones whose warnings (about suspicious plotting) should have the best chance of getting through to Harry. So I guess the question is whether it's plausible that all of these psychological tricks would've been enough to quiet Harry's suspicion. Is it plausible that it could happen, and is it likely enough to happen for Quirrell to try this risky plot?

Comment author: Danylo 26 October 2010 12:33:34AM *  2 points [-]

But what happened to his inner Slytherin, and the Draco inside his head? They, ironically, are the ones whose warnings (about suspicious plotting) should have the best chance of getting through to Harry.

That's an interesting point. In context of that, consider the following -- Harry is now [end of chapter 54] without protection from the Dementors, thus gone entirely to the 'dark side,' which in Harry as in most is rather Slytherin. That means that Harry is now in the perfect position to see how he's been manipulated, and act against on it: specifically, betraying Quirell and going with his first story "He made me do it." He can even attribute his attacking an Auror who thought about Moody* to the Dementors and potentially get away with the whole thing.

Just something to consider.

* I misread, but the point remains.

Comment author: TobyBartels 26 October 2010 07:13:44AM *  2 points [-]

his attacking Moody

Not Moody, but a cameo Auror who thought about Moody

Comment author: jsalvatier 25 October 2010 11:42:58PM 1 point [-]

I was surprised that we basically did not get to hear Quirrell explain how he knew Bella was innocent nor Harry ask.

Comment author: FAWS 26 October 2010 12:38:05AM 2 points [-]

Quirrell explicitly said that he couldn't tell him. There are a number of other interesting and important questions Harry could have asked, though.

Comment author: Unnamed 25 October 2010 11:26:35PM 7 points [-]

One other thing that Quirrell did was to portray the government of magical Britain as the opposition, since he and Harry agree that it's corrupt and incompetent. That made it easier for Harry to dismiss opposition to the plot as foolishness. It also bound Harry & Quirrell closer together in Harry's mind, and made their shared rationality salient.

But it could have driven Harry & Quirrell apart, since this is one area where Harry knows something about Quirrell's goals. They have talked about what kind of government would be best, and they disagree. They even had a kind of public debate about it. So why would Harry be so eager to join a secret organization to reform or overthrow the government of magical Britain, without at least worrying about what kind of government they're trying to bring about?

That's a worry that should carry over to Quirrell's actual plot. It's a very basic question: why is Quirrell doing this? What is he trying to accomplish? But one that Harry apparently never asks.

Comment author: David_Allen 25 October 2010 07:56:09PM 5 points [-]

To add to this, what will be done with Bellatrix after she is freed? Wouldn't Harry need an answer to this before cooperating with Quirrell?

Simply releasing Bellatrix to her own recognizance would be like releasing a hungry lion near a grade school during lunch hour. Without Voldemort personally directing her actions she would act out of her own sense of vengeance.

It isn't obvious to me that a simple "trust me" from Quirrell would convince Harry to cooperate.

Comment author: jsalvatier 25 October 2010 11:37:52PM 1 point [-]

I thought this was weird too, but EY has a habit of revealing plans as they are enacted rather than beforehand.

Comment author: Sniffnoy 25 October 2010 09:25:10PM *  1 point [-]

Quirrell's case in favor of Bellatrix's innocence sounds like what a partisan would say when trying to make their side seem favorable, not an argument that Harry would buy (just as he could see through Draco's case against Dumbledore). Genre savvy Harry has read plenty of stories about villains with a sympathetic backstory.

This is the one thing that bothers me about this; Quirrell's excuse for Bellatrix seems good enough to cover a lot of people. Hence I expect at least one of the following should hold:

  • Harry refuses to go along (this didn't occur)
  • Harry insists on modifying the plot to break out more people (this didn't occur)
  • Harry insists on going back to break out more people, to Quirrell's dismay
  • Harry insists on going back to break out more people, just as Quirrell was going for

...though I guess those last two look a good deal less likely now that I've seen the extent to which they bungled the breakout.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 25 October 2010 10:23:36PM *  6 points [-]

Edit: My inference that Quirrell is overwhelmingly vulnerable to Dementors seems to be incorrect, explanation here, although he is more vulnerable than usual. The importance of keeping Patronus 2.0 up derives from it being a blind spot for Dementors, allowing prisoners to escape. Enough time without Patronus 2.0 leads to impossibility of prison break.

Ch. 54. Since Quirrell was that unusually vulnerable to Dementors, he should've made the point of how important it is to keep the Patronus 2.0 up at all times and immediately restore it in case of failure, making that idea more available to Harry's mind. Not making that point explicitly was stupid.

(Quirrell should know that, since Auror's Patronus utterly failed to shield him from Azkaban's Dementors, which means that he must've felt the difference between level of protection from the Dementor offered by different Patronus variants at training session at Hogwarts, as well as the abnormal vulnerability to Dementors shielded by merely classical Patronus. The point of the training session now seems to be exactly the research on influence of Dementors on possessed Quirrell, with Harry's wand left near the Dementor possibly an experiment.)

Comment author: thomblake 26 October 2010 05:21:13PM 1 point [-]

The point of the training session now seems to be exactly the research on influence of Dementors on possessed Quirrell, with Harry's wand left near the Dementor possibly an experiment.

brilliant.

Comment author: orthonormal 25 October 2010 10:09:55PM *  5 points [-]

Ch. 54: If Harry and Quirrell discussed the possibility of an Auror seeing them, Harry should have told Quirrell that AK is out of the question- no sense in killing one innocent person in the course of saving one innocent person.

And it's a pretty big miscalculation of Quirrell not to anticipate Harry's intervention at the key moment. He really should have seen by now that Harry's light side is that strong.

Unless, of course, that was the real gambit somehow.

ETA: Loved the writing, though- I was on the edge of my seat.

Comment author: dclayh 28 October 2010 05:07:08AM *  2 points [-]

And it's a pretty big miscalculation of Quirrell not to anticipate Harry's intervention at the key moment.

I interpreted it that he was just too caught up in duelling-lust, and momentarily eriregrq gb uvf Qnex Ybeq crefban, forgetting how Harry would react.

ETA: rot-13d some stuff which is apparently supposed to be secret again.

Comment author: wedrifid 28 October 2010 06:23:35AM *  1 point [-]

ETA: rot-13d some stuff which is apparently supposed to be secret again.

Huh? Spoilers for HP and HP:MoR are fair game here!

Comment author: DanArmak 26 October 2010 08:48:16AM 3 points [-]

And it's a pretty big miscalculation of Quirrell not to anticipate Harry's intervention at the key moment. He really should have seen by now that Harry's light side is that strong.

Harry didn't consciously intervene. His Patronus 2.0 sort of teleported to block Quirrel's spell. Quirrel (like Harry) may not have even been aware that could happen.

Comment author: Sniffnoy 25 October 2010 10:12:24PM 2 points [-]

It's also a pretty big miscalculation of Harry not to anticipate Quirrell using AK in such a case! But that makes sense, considering how Quirrell got him into this in the first place.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 October 2010 03:34:07AM 1 point [-]

This is a general question based on the observations that Harry doesn't seem to be as acute as usual in the most recent chapter-- could there be a spell on him which is taking his default ability to check on whether things make sense down a few notches? What would it take for him to notice something like that?

Comment author: cousin_it 25 October 2010 09:09:21AM *  3 points [-]

Chapters 51-54: bravo! Some of the best writing so far. My new favorite line from the fic: "it was a down payment on everything that Harry meant to accomplish with his life". I immediately had to rewatch the training montage from the 2008 film "Wanted" that starts at about 46:00 to get more of the same emotion.

Comment author: Unnamed 24 October 2010 03:43:50AM 5 points [-]

chp 51

Lesath Lestrange to Harry Potter in chp 27: "They say you can do anything, please, please my Lord, get my parents out of Azkaban, I'll be your loyal servant forever, my life will be yours and my death as well, only please -"

Comment author: gwern 24 October 2010 05:43:04PM *  1 point [-]

So, you predict that Quirrel will also be trying to free Rodolphus (Bellatrix's husband), that is, Lesath's other parent?

(Is Rodolphus even alive in MoR? There are now so many points of difference that I can't really track them any more. EDIT: well, he wasn't mentioned at all in the last few chapters, and Quirrel seems perfectly satisfied with escaping with just Bellatrix, so I guess Rodolphus is out of the picture.)

Comment author: Unnamed 24 October 2010 06:51:15PM 3 points [-]

No, but it suggests that Lesath might suspect Harry's involvement in the escape and have an interesting reaction. Neville and Snape were there to witness this pleading, and Harry's reaction, so they could also be suspicious.

It's also possible, as others have been suggesting, that Lesath's father is not Rodolphus but Voldemort.

Comment author: pjeby 25 October 2010 03:44:16AM *  4 points [-]

No, but it suggests that Lesath might suspect Harry's involvement in the escape and have an interesting reaction.

I'm a bit disappointed that Harry hasn't noticed this, nor thought to ask what will happen when somebody has escaped Azkaban after a mysterious Dementor disappearance at Hogwarts... nor considered that Dumbledore at least should immediately suspect Harry's involvement, especially if any Dementors at Azkaban turn up missing.

What's more, if the Dementors are able to speak to the guards (as stated in ch. 51), then what exactly will happen when they report Harry's human-shaped Patronus?

Not considering any of these things seems out of character for Harry, his dreams of heroism notwithstanding. It seems he is making a huge mistake here, and preparing for a big change in his fortunes.

I'm beginning to wonder if Quirrelmort hasn't been planning all along to present Harry as "Voldemort returned", while he comes off looking like someone trying to protect magical Britain from this terrible scourge. He's spoken on the need for a Light Mark, and Harry publicly opposed it... which will look bad in retrospect.

[Edit: I guess I should've waited for ch. 53. Never mind.]

Comment author: alethiophile 25 October 2010 10:24:07PM 1 point [-]

I'm uncertain of Quirrel's motivations here. It's possible that up-till-now has been Just According To Plan, and the plan is to blame Harry for attempting to break Bellatrix out of Azkaban, and hence utterly discredit him as a possible later rival. However, this seems a little much like a Xanatos Roulette; Quirrel could not necessarily have planned for the Auror he fought to be there and to react in the precise way he did, and he certainly could not have planned for Harry's Patronus v2.0 being able to block AK (and Harry wanting to do so), nor for Harry losing his Patronus afterward. Thus, it seems likely that either Quirrel was indeed planning to be caught, but in a less flamboyant way, or that he meant to carry off the breakout and was messed up himself by Harry's actions.

Comment author: gwern 24 October 2010 07:50:02PM 3 points [-]

No, but it suggests that Lesath might suspect Harry's involvement in the escape and have an interesting reaction.

That would be an interesting scene - 'you saved my mother; why didn't you save my father, Harry?!'

Would Lesath feel bound to serve Harry just for Bellatrix's rescue? Maybe. IIRC, child psychologists find that kids bond with the mother more.

Comment author: ata 23 October 2010 10:54:21PM *  11 points [-]

I would like to take this opportunity to hail Discordia, and say that yes, in fact, I would like it very much if you started convincing people that I was some sort of shadowy conspiratorial figure. Honestly I'm disappointed that this hasn't happened already.

I would like to take this opportunity to say that I've long suspected you had Discordian sympathies (even before HJPEV started being really overt about it with Chaos Legion and such), and that I often already do portray you as a shadowy conspiratorial figure (and, occasionally, as a dark wizard) when I tell people about your work. Honestly, SIAI is the closest thing I know of to an actual honest-to-Gog real-life New World Order conspiracy, or at least the only one I know of whose master plan to utopia is both (1) plausible, and (2) not shockingly uncreative or unambitious or reactionary about what a better world could look like.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 23 October 2010 08:08:54PM 9 points [-]

Some thoughts about Comed-Tea.

(I apologize in advance if these have already been discussed; there are a LOT of MoR comments and I haven't read all of them. If someone points me at the thread I'll slink off quietly and apologetically and read it.)

1) It seems there have to be two pieces to the behavioral control surrounding Comed-Tea (supposing Harry's basic theory is correct).

The first piece is, as Harry infers, inducing the drinking of Comed-Tea just before a surprising event is about to occur.

The second is suppressing the drinking of Comed-Tea otherwise. Were it not so, the "guarantee" wouldn't work... there would be no reliable expectation of something surprising happening when you drink it.

That second part needn't be magical, incidentally; there are many things that suppress people's desire to drink them via non-magical routes... castor oil is a canonical example. But if Comed-Tea had blatantly aversive properties Harry presumably would have noticed that. So whatever the aversive factor is, it's subtle (which still doesn't make it magical).

Actually, now that I think about it, the first piece of that is so unreliable (that is, most surprising events aren't preceded by drinking C-T) that it's probably better to model it the other way: the unusual aspect of C-T is that it suppresses the desire to drink it UNLESS something surprising is about to happen.

This seems like a realization worth highlighting in the text, as it gets at a very basic and important fact about false positives and false negatives that people lose sight of all the time.

2) Harry seems to be holding the Idiot Ball when it comes to Comed-Tea's implications.

That is, he convinces himself that Comed-Tea doesn't have the ability to Alter the Very Fabric Of Reality... all it does is combine some minor clairvoyance with the ability to magically influence his decision to drink it... and drops the subject.

Um... really? Isn't that second thing basically a limited version of the Imperius Curse? Isn't that at least noteworthy?

At the very least, it suggests that Comed-Tea is an empirical test of defenses against magical mind-control: if Comed-Tea still works on Harry while using X, then X is not a defense against magical mind-control. Harry in the MoRverse is apparently an Occlumens; testing whether using Occlumency suppresses the effect of Comed-Tea seems worth doing. (This is admittedly difficult because Comed-Tea doesn't work reliably, but it's the best thing he's got at the moment. It seems out of character not to try. Also, if I'm right about point 1, then maybe Comed-Tea does work reliably... maybe it's chemically very addictive, but magically suppresses the cravings except at the right time. In that case using Occlumency against it, if it worked at all, would suddenly cause one to crave it. Which would be startling.)

More broadly, the implication that magic to systematically influence Harry's behavior without his knowledge or consent -- in other words, to introduce bias -- is cheap and widespread seems fundamentally important. What other forms of mind-control are operating in the wizarding world? Does Occlumency work against all of them? Does anything work against all of them? Who markets this stuff, anyway, and how was it developed, and why isn't it classified as an Unforgivable Soft Drink? Is there a variant formula that influences people not to bully one another, or to think rationally, or to hail Harry as their lord and master?

That none of this even occurs to Harry (let alone the rest of the wizarding world) in a world nominally without the Idiot Ball seems like a plot hole. That said, one could retcon it by suggesting that ubiquitous magical mind-control artifacts also suppress thinking about magical mind control. (You might even expect this: mind-controlling artifacts that don't do this don't become ubiquitous.)

Narratively, all of this seems like a worthwhile topic to explore in the context of MoR. The parallels to advertising and critical thinking skills, for example, seem inescapable.

3) I see a number of comments talking as though the Comed-Tea itself were influencing minds to drink it at the right moment, and as I recall Harry thinks this way as well.

That something is influencing the drinker's mind seems a sound theory, but that the Comed-Tea itself is doing so seems less clear. Harry should at least consider alternate theories.

In particular, if Harry is still positing an eavesdropping Atlantean Font of All Magic that responds to "Wingardium Levioso", it seems just as plausible that the AFoAM mediates the drinking of Comed-Tea.

Admittedly, the AFoAM is pretty close to being a Fully Generalized Explanation... which is to say, Harry is coming awfully close to theism there. But I suppose that's another post.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 06 November 2010 09:56:00PM 6 points [-]

(slaps self on forehead) It just occurred to me that the precognition theory is experimentally distinguishable from the alter-reality theory for Comed-Tea.

If Comed-Tea operates on precognition, then the frequency of potential spit-take inducing events (that is, events absurd enough to cause you to do a spit-take were you drinking something) should be the same for communities that have the stuff and communities that don't... the only difference should be that Comed-Tea containing communities drink the stuff just before they happen.

OTOH if the frequencies aren't the same, then the precognition theory runs into trouble. In that case something does appear to be increasing the likelihood of absurd events.

Of course, a third theory is that drinking Comed-Tea simply makes things seem more spit-take-worthy than they otherwise would be, thereby increasing the perceived frequency of such events... much like the frequency of giggle-inducing events increases after eating a hash brownie.

Comment author: NihilCredo 23 October 2010 09:28:54PM *  4 points [-]

1) Agree

2) "Limited version of the Imperius Curse" looks like an exaggeration to me - it isn't just a matter of scope, the Comed-Tea impulse can be resisted with little effort.

The level of its power of mental manipulation seems about on par with that of the bakery in the city I grew up in, which had set up shop in front of a particularly frequented bus stop and which would keep its doors half-open, even in winter, drowning the waiting (and often hungry) students and workers in the delicious smell of fresh bread and pastries.

That is to say, it's conceivable that the Comed-Tea doesn't use "real" mind-altering magic at all, but simply broadcasts a signal which, to the brain, appears analogous to the gurgling of a fountain on a hot summer day.

3) Well, yes, if all magic relies on the AFoAM while spells and magical items are just triggers this has a lot of implications, but I don't see how this concerns the Comed-Tea more than any other thing.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 23 October 2010 08:14:36PM 3 points [-]

Or, looking at it the other way... if it's plausible that Comed-Tea is capable of influencing Harry to drink it at the right moment (or, rather, just before the right moment), then I'm not sure why it isn't plausible that the phrase "Wingardium Levioso" is capable of influencing objects to levitate.

Words don't normally have that ability, and I can't imagine how they could, but the same is true of soft drinks.

Comment author: NihilCredo 23 October 2010 02:19:50PM 3 points [-]

New chapter.

In the lack of Comed-Tea, I suggest taking a sip of something before the final line.

Regarding the fact that, at the start of the scene, Quirrell skips one of the thirty security Charms, the most straightforward explanation is that it was just the one preventing time-travel within the room, but could there have been a more devious purpose?

Comment author: Sniffnoy 24 October 2010 01:35:21AM 2 points [-]

What seems strange to me is going to such a convoluted setup just to speak privately, when they already have a way of doing so. Either Quirrell doesn't actually trust the privacy of Mary's Room, or he's up to something. The latter seems more likely.

Comment author: Unnamed 24 October 2010 02:51:25AM 1 point [-]

Maybe they're headed straight to Azkaban and they need Mary's Room as their alibi.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 24 October 2010 03:07:28AM 2 points [-]

Maybe not "need", but could use as a precaution. Getting located as hypothetical culprits is too close to failure for expected outcome. On the other hand, what alibi given timeturners?

Comment author: Unnamed 24 October 2010 03:58:35AM 2 points [-]

Harry is bound to be a potential culprit in Dumbledore's mind, since he knows about the Patronus 2.0 and invisibility cloak. Although any alibi that places Harry with Quirrell is liable to increase Dumbledore's suspicions instead of reducing them, no matter how airtight it seems.

Comment author: ata 24 October 2010 04:07:04AM *  1 point [-]

Although any alibi that places Harry with Quirrell is liable to increase Dumbledore's suspicions instead of reducing them, no matter how airtight it seems.

This would provide an opportunity to have Harry explain conservation of expected evidence to Dumbledore, which is very slight evidence that it's going to happen (and would make a fun scene, in any case).

Comment author: Perplexed 24 October 2010 12:50:55AM 2 points [-]

I would guess that he omitted the one preventing anyone from apparating into the room. They have to get back in somehow in a few hours.

Comment author: topynate 24 October 2010 01:06:29AM 5 points [-]

I think that's almost it. My bet is that the invisibility cloak detector is the missing charm. Harry and Quirrell are already in the room when they arrive for the first time, and as soon as they see themselves leave via Time-Turner, they take the cloak off and finish their meal before leaving. But yeah, they have to be in the room at the same time that a bunch of charms are on it, so they can't seal it off completely.

Comment author: Perplexed 24 October 2010 02:10:24AM 2 points [-]

I'm pretty sure you (and VN) have it right. EY commented (to VN) that someone had already figured it out, and your theory had already appeared in a comment at the main fanfic review site.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 24 October 2010 01:05:50AM 1 point [-]

They have to get back in somehow in a few hours.

They don't. They just need to already be there, which opens another possibility for the omitted Charm: to avoid detecting/incapacitating themselves.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 23 October 2010 02:45:26PM 1 point [-]

Conservation of Detail. Obviously it means something; with some imagination on your part you could deduce what.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 23 October 2010 04:45:48PM *  15 points [-]

I can't see how it's possible to deduce such things, in the sense of obtaining an answer associated with high degree of confidence. It seems to be hindsight bias on your part to assume it's deducible, and similarly for some of the other hidden "facts" (or, alternatively, you meant to say something else, and didn't mean to imply high degree of confidence being obtainable, but I can't imagine what).

(Imagination allows noticing promising hypotheses, where a person lacking said imagination would need to learn that hypothesis from someone else. But it doesn't allow making confident conclusions despite lack of information, where uncertainty is appropriate. So there could be hypotheses which are better than any other possible hypothesis, but none of them would be "the deduced answer". If you argue that imagination is the problem, you need to be able to argue for your conclusion in a way that fends off other possible conclusions, and not just consistently determine your conclusion as an author by adding more facts to the story.)

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 23 October 2010 10:58:38PM 4 points [-]

Saw someone else do it already.

Actually this is a fallacy I've seen coming up a lot in discussions of the fic. People are so enchanted with being able to come up with many possibilities that they forget to ask which are the probable possibilities. Sure, the laws change somewhat when you're matching wits with an author instead of reality; but when it comes to people talking about lots of other possible explanations for the Mendelian pattern in wizard genetics, for example, they seem to be doing a Culture of Objections thing where they declare victory as soon as they come up with an overlooked possibility that can be used to reject the paper, never mind the prior probability on it.

I've seen this answer gotten, so I know it's gettable.

Comment author: mwaser 03 November 2010 12:14:56PM *  1 point [-]

I assume that it's been suggested before but . . . . may I suggest (cast a vote) that you spend a bit more effort to advertise HP&tMoR in more places? It's awesomely accessible (especially when considered in comparison to virtually anything else with close to the explanatory power) and an awful lot of fun to boot. (Actually, I should be suggesting that everyone here who likes it should make an effort to advertise it to all their friends. It certainly should have far, far more than 578 people who Like it on Facebook.).

Comment author: bogdanb 03 November 2010 12:00:46PM 1 point [-]

As far as I can tell, the likeliest (i.e., simplest IMO) in-world hypothesis is that Azkhaban already has lots of wards on it, and one of the “standard” ones was not necessary because of that.

ConservationOfDetail suggests that’s not the case, but I don’t quite see how we can deduce what you’re trying to do, especially keeping in mind that authors can do the same deductions we do and like to twist things by just picking a less-likely hypothesis and explain it after the fact (or just make the dice fall that way).

Comment author: TobyBartels 05 November 2010 03:14:53AM 2 points [-]

They're not in Azkaban at the time; this is the discussion in Mary's Room.

Comment author: bogdanb 16 November 2010 03:32:10PM 1 point [-]

Oh, you’re right. I got confused about which chapter we were discussing, sorry about that.

That said, something similar applies here: Quirell did 29 charms in Mary’s room, and 30 outside of it. A very simple hypothesis would be that the 30th was something already “implemented” in Mary’s room. (In fact, given that Mary’s room is described as particularly safe even before the charms, the surprising thing is he didn’t do significantly more than 30 charms outside it. The uniqueness of Mary’s room suggests that it would be hard to duplicate it, but it seems strange that nothing could be done to at least approximate it.)

Comment author: TobyBartels 18 November 2010 08:11:13AM 2 points [-]

But didn't he do all 30 charms on a previous visit to Mary's room?

There are too many chapters now for me to track this down easily.

Comment author: cousin_it 25 October 2010 07:49:25AM *  5 points [-]

Seconding Nesov's point. If you ask people to guess the number you have in mind, and someone says "three" (while others say "one" or "five" or "a hundred"), and you did in fact have in mind "three", that doesn't prove the answer is "gettable". Not saying that it isn't in fact gettable, only that you need a stricter test. For example, sometimes ask someone else to post a comment with the correct answer (or do it yourself using an alias) and see how it fares compared to other hypotheses.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 23 October 2010 11:56:32PM *  13 points [-]

Saw someone else do it already.

Do what? Confidently name the "official" hypothesis, guess teacher's password? There certainly are good hypotheses, possibly one hypothesis significantly better than any other, which makes the probability of privileging the one you had in mind non-trivial and thus explains your observations. It doesn't follow that it's correct to assign high level of certainty to that hypothesis (as a within-world event, not prediction about what you had in mind, as the latter would be biased towards the best guess and away from the long tail).

(My best guess in this particular case is "enable time turners (in some sense)", but I won't be confident it's indeed so, it could be something else. ETA: On reflection, "revealing if someone is already in the room" is a better guess, although one could sidestep the defenses by entering from the future as well as from the past, and so not be present at the time of the casting.)

Comment author: topynate 24 October 2010 12:34:50AM 1 point [-]

What if: a) Quirrell and Harry's actions in ch 51 only make sense in light of their planning to do something in particular, and b) doing that thing requires a charm not to be in place? I think that counts as a correct deduction.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 24 October 2010 12:39:15AM *  1 point [-]

(Somewhat) plausible hypothesis, not something to be confidently believed (which is the working interpretation of "deduction" I'm using, as stated at the beginning of the comment).

Comment author: topynate 24 October 2010 01:30:24AM *  1 point [-]

From the differing ways we treated the same two hypotheses just now I think we're disagreeing on how fine a distinction we accept between two hypotheses before we say that they're significantly different. From my perspective, apparating into the room and walking in under the cloak are functionally the same. In both cases, the purpose of leaving a charm off is to enable Q and H to walk out of the door as if they never left, and it's that which I'd say is a valid deduction. Within all the hypotheses which fit that pattern, some seem more likely than others, but perhaps none are more than plausible.

Comment author: tenshiko 21 October 2010 02:24:59AM *  4 points [-]

EDIT: Spoilers even if you have read all chapters (particularly spoilery to those who have not read the original books). Following post is in rot13. Collapse thread from this comment if you want to avoid said spoilers, as some repliers commented in rot26 before it was established this information qualified as spoilage.

-

Gurer unf orra fbzr pbaprea nobhg ubj vg qbrfa'g frrz gb or pbzzba xabjyrqtr gung Dhveery vf orvat cbffrffrq ol Ibyqrzbeg va guvf fgbel (pbeerpg zr vs V'z jebat, ohg V xabj gung nppbeqvat gb gur nhgube'f abgr nepuvir ba uggc://jjj.obk.arg/funerq/skq7ce100m Lhqxbjfxl fgngrq gung "gur ernqre vf fhccbfrq gb xabj ng guvf cbvag gung CD vf YI"). Ubjrire, nf sne nf V haqrefgbbq, gb znal ernqref (zlfrys vapyhqrq) vg fgvyy frrzf fbzrjung nzovthbhf. N cebcbfrq pnhfr bs gur ceboyrz:

N: Dhveeryy vf cbfrffrq ol Ibyqrzbeg. O: Gur jnl Dhveeryy npgrq va pnaba va sebag bs Uneel, cevbe gb gur erirny gung ur jnf Ibyqrzbeg, jnf trarenyyl cynlvat gur ebyr bs n zvyq-znaarerq cebsrffbe. P: Gur jnl Dhveeryy npgf va ZbE va sebag bs Uneel vf nf n onqnff cebsrffbe.

Gur xrl nffhzcgvba orvat znqr ol pregnva ernqref vf gung N--->O naq bayl O, naq fb ~O--->~N, naq fb P--->~N. Guvf vf n pyrne snyynpl jura fgngrq rkcyvpvgyl, ohg jura yrsg vzcyvpvg gur vzcebcre ybtvp tbrf haabgvprq ol zbfg. Fbzrguvat gung zvtug uryc va guvf ertneq zvtug or gb unir fbzr nqhyg cbvag bhg gung Dhveeryy unf punatrq fvapr gurl ynfg zrg uvz, rg prgren, nygubhtu ng 50 puncgref vg'f engure uneq gb chg gung va fzbbguyl naq vg jbhyq pbzr bss gb ernqref cerivbhfyl pbaivaprq gung Dhveeryy jnf abg Dhveeryyzbeg (jurgure sebz vaabprapr gb UC pnaba be whfg abg guvaxvat vg nccyvrq va guvf cnegvphyne fgbel) nf urnil-unaqrq sberfunqbjvat, naq gb ernqref jub unq haqrefgbbq gur znggre sebz rneyl ba vg jbhyq frrz gb or znxvat n cyrnfnagyl fhogyr cbvag gbb boivbhf.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 22 October 2010 08:58:53PM 1 point [-]

I came to realize in time that what I thought was a bug was a feature, however frustrating that may be for me, so please rot13 that comment with the warning "spoilers even if you've read all chapters".