You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Xachariah comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 16, chapter 85 - Less Wrong Discussion

9 Post author: FAWS 18 April 2012 02:30AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (1106)
Tags: fiction hpmor harry_potter fanfiction

Comments (1106)

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

Comment author: anotherblackhat 19 April 2012 02:41:48PM 3 points [-]

Tom Riddle: "And how exactly does one split his soul?"
Slughorn: "Well, you must understand that the soul is supposed to remain intact and whole. Splitting it is an act of violation, it is against nature."
Tom Riddle: "But how do you do it?"
Slughorn: "By an act of evil -- the supreme act of evil. By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. The wizard intent upon creating a Horcrux would use the damage to his advantage: he would encase the torn portion --"

MoR!Horcrux might be different, but it seems likely that killing a willing victim isn't good enough, it has to be murder most foul. If a MoR!Horcrux is different, and only requires a death, then why assume a human death is required?

Comment author: Xachariah 20 April 2012 04:52:15AM 19 points [-]

You know, this sounds terrible but might be able to put the abortion debate to rest using the creation of a Horcruxes. It would be a horrible violation of human rights and ethics, but you could nail down the exact moment it became murder with enough testing. (Edit: I suppose you could do this on fetuses already slated for abortion anyways to avoid the ethical dilemmas.)

I wonder if pro-lifers and pro-choicers would have different threshholds for age required when to create a horcrux. And if so, I wonder if it would it be possible to create a horcrux with a murder that exists entirely within the mind of the murderer (eg, fake murder like in the Milgram experiment).

It's probably best that I'm not a wizard scientist.

Comment author: Alejandro1 20 April 2012 04:09:28PM 1 point [-]

It would be a neat solution if murdering fetuses, animals, infants, etc. as compared to adult humans ripped apart varying-sized fragments of your soul depending on the level of personhood of the victim, and the resulting Horcruxes could store more or less of your soul (i.e. more or less of your personality and memories) depending on the same. Canon probably rules it out, though, or Voldemort would not have gone after a baby for his final Horcrux.

Comment author: pedanterrific 20 April 2012 05:09:01PM 1 point [-]

Canon probably rules it out, though, or Voldemort would not have gone after a baby for his final Horcrux.

He didn't; the Harrycrux was accidental, and he killed Bertha Jorkins to make Nagini in '94.

Comment author: Alejandro1 20 April 2012 05:33:29PM 2 points [-]

I can't find confirmation of this online, and I don't have the books with me, but I seem to remember Dumbledore telling Harry in HBP that Voldemort had intended to use the murder of baby Harry as means to create his last Horcrux (the planned Horcrux would not have literally been dead baby Harry, of course). Of course, that might have been mere speculation by Dumbledore, or I might be misremembering.

Comment author: pedanterrific 20 April 2012 05:59:27PM *  2 points [-]

Seems like speculation to me:

However, if my calculations are correct, Voldemort was still at least one Horcrux short of his goal of six when he entered your parents' house with the intention of killing you. He seems to have reserved the process of making Horcruxes for particularly significant deaths. You would certainly have been that. He believed that in killing you, he was destroying the danger the prophecy had outlined. He believed he was making himself invincible. I am sure that he was intending to make his final Horcrux with your death. As we know, he failed.

It should be noted that "he reserved making Horcruxes for significant deaths" is flat wrong.

Comment author: 75th 22 April 2012 12:17:55AM 0 points [-]

How do we know it's wrong? As far as I can remember, the only two deaths to which we can pin the creation of horcruxes are Moaning Myrtle's and Harry Potter's. Myrtle herself wasn't significant, but she was the casualty of Slytherin's Basilisk, which Tom Riddle had commanded, which proved that he was the Heir of Slytherin. It was his coming out as the Heir of Slytherin, which would have been very significant to Riddle.

Comment author: pedanterrific 22 April 2012 12:50:05AM 5 points [-]

All the sources I've found indicate the deaths used to create the Horcruxes are Myrtle (diary) - Riddle Sr. (ring) - an unnamed Muggle tramp (locket) - Hepzibah Smith (cup) - an unnamed Albanian peasant (diadem) - Voldemort himself (Harry) - Bertha Jorkins (Nagini), in that order.

Comment author: 75th 22 April 2012 03:30:56AM 1 point [-]

Ah yeah, that list does ring a bell. Right you are, then.

Comment author: glumph 27 April 2012 06:52:55PM *  0 points [-]

I thought that the Nagini horcrux was made via the killing of Frank Bryce. Don't have the book with me to check, though.

Comment author: shminux 27 April 2012 07:00:34PM 1 point [-]

This being the 21st century, shall we make it up or look it up?

Comment author: GeorgieChaos 20 April 2012 04:24:24PM -1 points [-]

Wouldn't he? I though he got madder & less reliable as he shaved off more & more of his soul; less & less recognizably human, too. If it had been the case that he could make a small Horcrux later on when that decay was already advanced then it might have made a sort of sense to take a smaller fragment of himself away from the already damaged original.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit