gwern comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 9 - Less Wrong

10 Post author: Oscar_Cunningham 09 September 2011 01:29PM

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

Comments (718)

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

Comment author: Jonathan_Elmer 03 November 2011 06:46:04PM *  19 points [-]

I have an idea for an epic maneuver that a wizard could perform as a last resort in certain emergency situations. A severely wounded wizard could, if there is something of much greater utility then his own life on the line, transfigure himself into a healthy version of himself in order to continue the fight. This would be a death sentence, but still worth it if the stakes were high enough.

Then again Harry can already sustain a small transfigured object even in his sleep. Perhaps the most powerful of wizards could sustain a transfiguration on their own body indefinitely. Or... Professor McGonagall said that it would be possible for a child to transfigure themselves into an adult bodily form. Perhaps if the wizard could not sustain an object the size of their own body indefinitely after the emergency situation has passed they could again transfigure themselves into a adolescent, child, or midget form in order to achieve a body with a volume that they could sustain. Unless doing another transfiguration would cause the consequences of the previous transfiguration to be imposed on the new form. Though I don't see why that would necessarily be the case.

This would be a very fragile sort of existence. They would be much weaker due to the constant drain on their magic and incapacitation or anything that dispels the transfiguration would result in death.

Comment author: gwern 03 November 2011 11:15:13PM 5 points [-]

You know, that might work. I mean, it's well-known that "Gamp's Law of Elemental Transfiguration" allows one to increase the amount of good food you have.

Comment author: AspiringKnitter 22 December 2011 02:15:41AM 6 points [-]

...Is it just me, or should that create a post-scarcity economy? Because that lets you make food in ways that violate the conservation of energy.

How to survive as a wizard: 1. Get some nutritious, nonperishable food. 2. Make more. 3. Eat, but not all of it. 4. Repeat steps 2-3 indefinitely.

Water isn't a problem, since aguamenti conjures it.

So, question: why are there house elves? Why does Mrs. Weasley cook?

...Why can't the Weasleys buy a can of Coca-Cola, create as many more as they want and sell them? And do the same with hot dogs? And get rich?

No, seriously. That makes no sense. But that's a problem with canon, not MoR.

Comment author: gwern 22 December 2011 05:01:52AM 6 points [-]

The dark secret, AspiringKnitter, is that all the food magic actually works on the same principle as the Hogwarts Hall meals - enslaved house-elves in obscure kitchens. That they feel no need to mention this merely demonstrates how thoroughly wizarding society is based on slavery. (We didn't hear about the house-elves for how many books?)

Comment author: AspiringKnitter 22 December 2011 05:54:56AM *  2 points [-]

One, actually, but your point still stands. That is just plain creepy. Wait a minute. Why would it work for people who don't own house-elves, then?

Comment author: gwern 22 December 2011 03:38:34PM *  2 points [-]

Watch your Fox News; it's England so they have socialism.

Comment author: AspiringKnitter 22 December 2011 06:37:00PM 3 points [-]

They have socialized slavery?

There are so many things wrong with that.

Comment author: shminux 22 December 2011 07:00:21PM 0 points [-]

I think gwern omitted the <sarcasm> tag in his reply

Comment author: [deleted] 22 December 2011 08:43:21PM 11 points [-]

No: it was there, he just spelled it Fox News.

Comment author: gwern 22 December 2011 07:24:20PM 0 points [-]

Well, you know, under socialism everyone is a slave to the state. So it's hardly inconsistent.

Comment author: AspiringKnitter 23 December 2011 10:17:44PM 1 point [-]

You know, I wonder whether Magical Britain has policies as liberal (American liberal, which I think means socialist in the rest of the world) as Real Britain. Somehow, I think not, but do we have evidence either way?

Comment author: Suryc11 24 December 2011 07:56:15AM *  1 point [-]

American liberal, which I think means socialist in the rest of the world

Just a minor nitpick, I think it's the other way around. I'm reasonably sure that the American form of liberalism is usually on the right end of the political spectrum in other Western democracies. What is called liberal in other countries is what many Americans would call socialist and what is called moderate is 'American liberal'. Specifically, the Democratic Party's (the major party that most Americans call liberal) significant policy stances would probably be considered moderate in Great Britain and conservative in Denmark.