= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
moridinamael comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 9 - 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 (718)
During Hermione's description, my brain immediately pointed out that no one could possibly know whether or not Seers can give prophesies with no one around to hear them, because the Seers don't remember doing it and, well, there's no one else around to notice.
Maybe Seers are just constantly prophesying when they're alone and no one has any idea.
Confirmation Bias exists for wizards just as well as muggles.
Nobody remembers the three other children destined to defeat He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named, and that's to be expected for someone who dies so young with no notable achievements to their name. But Harry Potter? Why, once the Dark Lord is defeated and the story gets out, everyone will know he was prophesied to win for sure!
They could possibly know, if they were to, say, keep recording devices on a large population of known seers, but from what we've seen so far I don't think I would credit the wizarding world in general with that much rigor.
I don't think that would really settle the matter, though. All you would then know is whether seers prophesied when only in the presence of recording devices. (If a seer prophesied in the forest and no one was there to hear, would it constrain the future?) I wonder what you would call that, actually- the Cassandra Uncertainty Principle?