= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CronoDAS comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 6 - Less Wrong Discussion
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)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (541)
Chapter 65:
Should Harry believe what Quirrell told him about the destination of the Portkey?
And where did the Portkey lead to before Quirrell tapped it with his wand?
I was more interested in Quirrell's statement about the note. Have we seen evidence before that the lawyer/genie style of not-technically-lying is particularly relevant in the magical world? Veritaserum, perhaps?
Magical means of compelling truth do seem like a good reason to develop a habit of being able to mislead others without technically lying to them.
Would veritaserum allow you to remain in a state in which you are capable of deliberately misleading, even if by strict reading of what you say, it's true from a certain perspective?
(I guess we'd have to in part know something about the mechanism of its operation, and why it is that in the MoRverse, being an occulamens makes you immune to it, before we could guess at that)
Given what we know about how other magic in the setting works, my guess would be that it works partly by doing some mechanical Legilemency and keying off of intent to deceive, whereupon it triggers some sort of inhibitory condition. Seems in line with Eliezer's explanations for other apparently inexplicable effects, like the Comed-Tea.
Yes. It's a question that could be verified by a third party without too much difficulty, and I think Quirrell would strongly disprefer to be caught lying. Making Harry mistrust the note-sender may be to his advantage, but I don't think it's enough to outweigh the downside.
If he did (somehow) know about the note before Harry told him about it, there could well be some plausibly deniable reason he could later give as to why he was only able to say "London" and not "The Chancery Building"
I'm not sure what potential risks portkeys could have over long distances (in Canon Potter, to say nothing of MOR Potter) so this might not actually be evidence of trickery on Santa Claus' part, although since neither of the two brought it up I'm probably just fighting Santa Claus not intending to send Harry to Salem because that's just what Eliezer wants us to think.
Canon presents it as very safe. It's used internationally; I believe we read in Goblet of Fire of people coming from North America to Britain via portkey and possibly even further. No risks are ever seen or mentioned (in stark contrast to apparition or Floo or broom). It's used in preference to any of the other methods for children going to the Quidditch World Cup, further cementing its apparent safety. And so on. The downside seems to be that it's somewhat unwieldy and inflexible, and not too great at moving lots of people from point A to point B (witness the Hogwarts Express versus the the difficulties Harry & co. have with their large portkey group going to the Cup).
And it still might be useful as a "panic button" if all else fails - yes, it might be a trap of some kind, but it still might be better than whatever immediate danger Harry finds himself in.
Of course, the best time to lie is once you have a reputation for perfect honesty.
Nobody trusts anyone to be perfectly honest. In my view, the best time to lie is once you've built up a misleading reputation for being bad at lying.
Not quite - it's the easiest time to lie, but it can still be a terrible idea.
The best time to lie is when you can't be caught.
Quirrel has been reluctant to outright lie so far...