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Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).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Eliezer Yudkowsky which is not supposed to be publicly available (which includes public statements by Eliezer that have been retracted).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.

I did not recognise the term "lich phylactery", so did a quick Google. It is basically exactly the same as a horcrux, as defined in Dungeons and Dragons. Did JK Rowling pinch the idea from D+D, or did they both get it from a common source?

This wikipedia article) contains some rather interesting quotes:

In some sources the method of becoming a lich is referred to as the Ritual of Becoming or Ceremony of Endless Night. The process is often described as requiring the creation and consumption of a deadly potion, the Elixir of Defilation, which is to be drunk on a full moon;

Hmm... The mysterious ritual at the start of Chapter 1 takes place by moonlight...

a Lich has unnatural powers owing to its state. For example, it can put mortals in a paralyzed state of hibernation with their minds, making them seem dead to others

Very interesting... but can it fool the Hogwarts wards as well?

I did not recognise the term "lich phylactery", so did a quick Google. It is basically exactly the same as a horcrux, as defined in Dungeons and Dragons. Did JK Rowling pinch the idea from D+D, or did they both get it from a common source?

The idea of a creature which can preserve its soul or life in an object is very old, and has appeared both in mythological sources and fantasy for a long time. For example, the Chronicles of Prydain were published in the 1960s and had at one point a villain with a similar situation. To a lesser extent, Sauro... (read more)