= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanielLC comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, February 2015, chapters 105-107 - 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)
Comments (353)
Harry made some serious mistakes in chapter 105.
First, the parseltongue honesty-binding could just be Quirrell's (selective!) wandless magic--I mean, he just forged a note "from yourself" (and why do you even MAKE a self-recognition ("I am a potato") policy if you just forget all about it once you're in a life-stakes intrigue) so you need a lot of extra suspicions going forward. But assuming it's real... there are crucial questions Harry can now profitably ask, with his help conditional on getting immediate Parseltongue answers, along the lines of:
"Why did you set up this elaborate ruse instead of just asking me? Most of what you're saying right now sounds like something I would've probably agreed to if you were open about it, but no, you had to pretend you were dying and kill my friend, so it sure seems like you're planning nefarious things I'd rather not aid even at the cost of my life and the hostages' lives... does my CURRENT utility function actually prefer your planned results to the death of me and the hostages?"
(This isn't the perfect phrasing; for one thing Quirrell doesn't necessarily know Harry's utility function to high accuracy, for another Harry might have disagreed to the "open" proposal at weaker dispreference than "this is worse than my death". But something similar...)
Iff Quirrell is at all "innocent" at this point, he'd want to answer these, and never mind the "my policy is never to reveal that much or people will know I'm guilty later when I actually need to keep mum" stuff; these stakes seem high enough to outweigh any future similar dealings. If he's guilty, then just die like you'd apparently prefer.
[the only edits I made here after getting responses were to correct my spelling of "Quirrell", and this note]
I'm surprised Quirrell couldn't do a better job with the note. He could have given Harry the memory of making a new self-recognition policy, which would be a sensible thing for Harry to do after his occlumency training.
1) It's not clear how easy it is to Memory-charm an Occlumens. 2) As far as we know, Quirrel & Harry can't directly use magic on each other.
Your point 2 is another thing I'm getting pretty suspicious of. Quirrell has set up a very long plan, and could easily have faked this effect with wandless magic, or an enchantment he could later dispel, all along.
I find it highly unlikely that he faked the Avada Kedavra/Patronus effect in Azkaban...
That could just be a feature of the True Patronus, which is pretty anti-death and especially anti-indifference-to-other-people's-lives.
But that's the first time Potter sees their magic interact, so what effect did Quirrell fake?
The sense of doom. I thought the magic-can't-interact was mostly just the strongest edge of that--e.g. (maybe "i.e." too) their magic could interact but it would hurt them enough that they don't try.
Memory Charms on students set off the wards, so he'd be drawing attention to himself (plus he'd need to have Sprout do it, which may have various complications of its own).
Why is this comment retracted?
Apparently Professors can cast memory charms without setting off the wards.