= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
siduri comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 7 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (495)
Chapter 69 was adorable. Thank you for that, EY, it was wonderful from beginning to end. Your Hermione is recognizably the same Hermione that I loved in canon, just reacting to a somewhat different set of circumstances: I think SPHEW is an excellent twist. And I'm starting to feel extremely fond of Daphne as well.
Very small question: I was confused by the line the Hufflepuff boy was sitting up, and groaning and rubbing his skull where he'd been dropped head-first into the floor; it was a good thing he hadn't been a Muggle, Hermione realized, or he might have snapped his neck.
What is it about wizards that makes their necks less likely to snap? Can somebody explain that reference for me?
There are some implications in canon that wizards are more durable than Muggles, although canon isn't completely consistent on this matter. It may be simply due to the unconscious or reflexive use of magic. The two data points that are most relevant in canon off the top of my head are Hagrid's remark in book one that there's no way Lilly and James would have died in a car crash, and the fact that the upper limit on the lifespan of wizards is apparently much higher than that of Muggles (Dumbeldore is well over a hundred.)
Of course, it's possible that James and Lilly would never have died in a car crash because they have no need to drive.
I thought it was more of a joke about the movies, where people get thrown around in typical hollywood fashion in ways that should kill a human but barely seem to phase the wizards. (Mostly during Quidditch)
In chapter 36, when Harry's family goes over to the Granger's for Christmas,
I'm fairly certain there are other instances as well, but I can't seem to find any more.
My vote is on reflexive use of magic, rather than a physiological difference.
My vote is on reflexive use of magic
Okay, gotcha. I don't think that's supposed to be very reliable, though, at least not canonically.
Applying Fridge Logic, I don't see how they could play a game where iron balls flew around trying to brain people without it being at least somewhat reliable.
On the other hand, Dobby's Bludger did break Harry's arm...
Yep, see Ch. 17.
It's not made particularly clear whether this is due to physical differences or unconscious use of magic, but there are a number of suggestions in canon that wizards tend to be physically tougher than Muggles. IIRC, Rowling's version of Neville was only discovered to be a wizard when he was dropped from a height and bounced.
IIRC, Rowling's version of Neville was only discovered to be a wizard when he was dropped from a height and bounced.
Ah, see, it never occurred to me to read that as anything other than subconscious use of magic.
That is what Rowling implied. Eliezer seems to have satirised some of the unrealistic parts of canon with respect to human physiology under trauma by making wizards explicitly more durable in MoRverse.
As some other commenters have pointed out, there's some fanon out there that says wizards are protected from damage by unconscious use of magic. I think it may have started with this essay from 2002.