wedrifid 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.

Comments (1174)

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

Comment author: wedrifid 23 March 2012 04:05:25PM *  3 points [-]

Harry could destroy his own reputation in order to save Hermione, by (for example) threatening to forever abandon Wizarding Britain.

Shouldn't they take that for granted already? I mean obviously he's going to have absolutely no remaining loyalty to the state - or at least the power structure - that did that to him. They should all expect to die whenever Harry finds it convenient to overthrow them. Or is that just what I would do?

(Any sane politician who was planning to make that sort of move against a potential emergent power like Harry would also see to it that they were killed, crippled or framed as a matter of course. You don't go around recklessly making enemies and leaving them free to gather power.)

Comment author: gwern 23 March 2012 05:30:40PM 11 points [-]

"...Upon this, one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge."

--Machiavelli

Comment author: wedrifid 23 March 2012 05:42:10PM 0 points [-]

Exactly the philosophy I had in mind! Is this also present in rationality quotes somewhere? It certainly should be.

Comment author: gwern 23 March 2012 05:48:19PM 0 points [-]

I don't see it anywhere.