DanArmak comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 11 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: Oscar_Cunningham 17 March 2012 09:41AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (1174)
Tags: fiction fanfiction harry_potter hpmor

Comments (1174)

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

Comment author: Daniel_Starr 19 March 2012 04:54:03AM *  5 points [-]

I suggest: (1) all Harry needs is time, (2) Dumbledore refuses to give it to him, (3) Harry offers Lucius an Unbreakable Vow.

In theory, Obliviations and False Memories can be broken, right? So what's Dumbledore's excuse for not insisting on a delay in punishment long enough to attempt to break the alleged tampering with Hermione's brain?

[ETA: actually, doesn't matter whether the spells are known breakable; Harry could experiment with counterspells or just hunt for the real villain. Either way, Harry will be confident that he can get the truth -- given time.]

It seems like Quirrell stands to take away three of Harry's supports - if Harry realizes that Dumbledore won't insist on even a delay in punishing Hermione to test whether she's actually innocent, he's hardly likely to ever trust Dumbledore ever again.

Meanwhile, it seems like the obvious "taboo tradeoff" for Harry to offer for Hermione is some kind of Unbreakable Vow for the Malfoys' benefit - especially since Lucius believes (sort of correctly!) that Harry is Voldemort. That would be fun storytelling, since an Unbreakable Vow for Draco's benefit also shows up in canon. Is there a more appropriate bribe Harry could offer than that?

And would Harry and Lucius actually come to an agreement in such a negotiation, or would Harry's maximum offer be less than Lucius' minimum offer? Since Lucius has Hermione as hostage, it would be tricky, though not impossible, for Harry to simply threaten the Malfoys into handing Hermione over.

But suppose Harry can't make a deal with Lucius, can't contact Quirrell in time, and can't get Dumbledore to take effective action - then what is Harry's best option at this point if he absolutely refuses to let Hermione be turned into a house-elf (or whatever)? Is Harry's best solo option to get to Azkaban on his own and lead out a Dementor army? (I didn't say good, just best...)

Is there a save-Hermione option that would make sense to us that Harry is unlikely to consider?

Comment author: DanArmak 19 March 2012 04:53:56PM *  8 points [-]

Good ideas.

My thoughts:

  • Harry may be unable to talk to Lucius privately before the trial. If negotiations take place during the trial, that'll be an interesting scene.
  • Remember what each party sacrifices in an Unbreakable Vow. Lucius would sacrifice his ability to ever trust Harry again. Lucius may think this is not a problem, as he thinks Harry is Voldemort, but Harry may be hurt by this down the line. Also, they'll need to find a Binder who'll permanently sacrifice some of his magic to sustain the vow (are those routinely available for pay?)
  • Can the vow enforce factual claims about the past? E.g., "I vow that I am not Voldemort as you suspect", "I vow that I was always Draco's friend and am not to blame for the assassination attempt", etc. If yes - that is, Harry would be unable to Vow falsehoods - then he could convince Lucius of his goodwill. OTOH, if he actually tried to vow "I am not Voldemort", the result should be.. .educational.
  • The Vow can probably be engineered to enforce past-claims. E.g., "I vow to kill myself in one minute if this is not true: ..."
  • Harry has a lot to offer to vow that he values low (because he already wants to do it) but Lucius values high (because he has no guarantee of it). Ideas: eternal friendship, honesty, and political alliance with Draco; eventually public political falling-out with Dumbledore (say, on his majority or graduation); dedication to exposing and punishing the real criminal behind the attack on Draco; personal declaration of war on whoever-killed-Narcissa (Lucius may not trust Harry at his plain word on this like Draco did); future favors to be redeemed by Draco.
Comment author: Xachariah 19 March 2012 11:19:19PM 3 points [-]

Also, they'll need to find a Binder who'll permanently sacrifice some of his magic to sustain the vow (are those routinely available for pay?)

Yes. Presumably the person who bound the Auror Legillimancer did so out of pay rather than love. Additionally, Harry could just go find a dying wizard who wants to make some galleons since he's solved that problem. I'd assume that finding a binder is not an obstacle to people like the Malfoys.

Comment author: gwern 19 March 2012 07:52:20PM 1 point [-]

Can the vow enforce factual claims about the past? E.g., "I vow that I am not Voldemort as you suspect", "I vow that I was always Draco's friend and am not to blame for the assassination attempt", etc. If yes - that is, Harry would be unable to Vow falsehoods - then he could convince Lucius of his goodwill. OTOH, if he actually tried to vow "I am not Voldemort", the result should be.. .educational.

Should be able to, since enforcing honesty would seem to be on offer if ordinary Veritaserum can do as much... Now, the question is, does an Unbreakable Vow to tell the truth overcome obliviation/memory charming/pensieves etc? One might expect powerful sacrificial magic to be able to do that, but then again, if it did, you'd expect officials of some stripe to have such Vows as matters of course and we don't see that (on the gripping hand, wizarding society is not that efficient or imaginative).

Comment author: DanArmak 19 March 2012 08:11:11PM 5 points [-]

I would expect a Vow only binds you to tell the truth as you know it at that moment. Nevertheless:

"I vow that to the best of my knowledge in the past XXX. I also vow that if I ever discover evidence that this is false and I had been Obliviated or Memory Charmed to enable me to make this vow today, I will come tell you all about it and submit to your judgement with a specified possible penalty."

So you can at least bind yourself irrevocably to your new position.

if it did, you'd expect officials of some stripe to have such Vows as matters of course and we don't see that

Of course not, the high-grade politician doesn't exist who could vow that they'd been honest upstanding citizens all their lives :-)

If IRL we discovered a really reliable neurological lie detector, it would be used by police and courts, but do you really think politicians and CEOs would ever submit to it?

Comment author: lavalamp 20 March 2012 02:23:43AM 7 points [-]

If IRL we discovered a really reliable neurological lie detector, it would be used by police and courts, but do you really think politicians and CEOs would ever submit to it?

If we did that, I think we would just end up selecting CEOs and politicians with firm self-deceptions instead of those who gave accurate information.

Comment author: Solvent 20 March 2012 09:19:03AM 1 point [-]

I think you may be being too cynical here.

Comment author: lavalamp 20 March 2012 07:05:05PM 4 points [-]

I'm being too cynical about... politicians?

...Maybe I need to move to wherever you live...

Comment author: Solvent 20 March 2012 11:35:43PM 3 points [-]

I'm just saying that making lying extremely more difficult is also likely to cut down on lying. The advantage which you'd have to get from lying would have to be higher than the current threshold to bother.

Comment author: DanArmak 20 March 2012 08:14:46AM 0 points [-]

Good point, and politicians could use it to avoid the test too.

Comment author: gwern 19 March 2012 08:41:36PM 2 points [-]

If IRL we discovered a really reliable neurological lie detector, it would be used by police and courts, but do you really think politicians and CEOs would ever submit to it?

I'd expect some CEOs would submit to it and their stock would be rewarded for it.

Comment author: Jello_Raptor 20 March 2012 02:35:12AM 2 points [-]

To boot, I would be very surprised if people elected politicians who hadn't submitted to the lie detector after it had the cultural time to sink in.

People with foresight would work very hard to discredit it before that happened though.

Comment author: loserthree 20 March 2012 04:04:40PM 1 point [-]

We might not know if they already had.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit