Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 23, chapter 94

elharo

This is a new thread to discuss Eliezer Yudkowsky’s Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality and anything related to it. This thread is intended for discussing chapter 94. The previous thread has passed 200 comments.

There is now a site dedicated to the story at hpmor.com, which is now the place to go to find the authors notes and all sorts of other goodies. AdeleneDawner has kept an archive of Author’s Notes. (This goes up to the notes for chapter 76, and is now not updating. The authors notes from chapter 77 onwards are on hpmor.com.)

The first 5 discussion threads are on the main page under the harry_potter tag. Threads 6 and on (including this one) are in the discussion section using its separate tag system. Also: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22.

Spoiler Warning: this thread is full of spoilers. With few exceptions, spoilers for MOR and canon are fair game to post, without warning or rot13. More specifically:

You do not need to rot13 anything about HP:MoR or the original Harry Potter series unless you are posting insider information from Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).

If there is evidence for X in MOR and/or canon then it’s fine to post about X without rot13, even if you also have heard privately from Eliezer that X is true. But you should not post that “Eliezer said X is true” unless you use rot13.

Spoiler Warning: this thread is full of spoilers. With few exceptions, spoilers for MOR and canon are fair game to post, without warning or rot13. More specifically:

You do not need to rot13 anything about HP:MoR or the original Harry Potter series unless you are posting insider information from Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).

If there is evidence for X in MOR and/or canon then it’s fine to post about X without rot13, even if you also have heard privately from Eliezer that X is true. But you should not post that “Eliezer said X is true” unless you use rot13.

"Why not just destroy him instead? Quirrell at least would think of that at once." THAT...is a very, very good question. And btw, Quirrel has many other names: Voldemort, Monroe, possibly "black hat"...

Why DIDN"T he just teach harry how to use cursed-fire, and tell him to go far away from Hogwarts (easily enough arranged) to avoid killing any bystanders? (To, yknow, avoid the appearance of being evil...) Seems to me that would be a fast way to preserve the status quo of the universe... I notice that I am rather confused. I am going to meditate before I post the theory that's offering itself as a resolution.

ok. so: assuming Harry's memory of the night his parents died is correct, what if the crucial difference is that, instead of shrugging Lilly off, Voldemort accepted her bargain...making it a two-person ritual rather than just a one-person ritual...which meant that not only was Harry protected against Voldemort, now the latter had to actively guard Harry's life.

Second part: And as he looked into harry's eyes...he had his equivalent of an "oh crap", and then made harry a horcrux because he figured he may as well. Which THEN sparked a nasty res... (read more)