= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Kawoomba comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 24, chapter 95 - 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)
Comments (304)
There's a spell that doesn't reveal the true cloak of invisibility, but indicates that such an artefact is present. You could imagine a corresponding spell for souls, or a dog which only barks at soul-imbued creatures (may bark twice at soul-imbued postmen and once at soul-less postmen. In which case you'd need to ask "are you a postman" using veritaserum to distinguish false positives for souls.).
How would you distinguish this from a spell which merely tests if one has been exposed to the Dementor's Kiss?
If it gives a positive response to humans and some/all intelligent non-humans but a negative one to people made brain-dead through purely physical means and/or various animals?
We still have no way of knowing if it's testing for souls or brain activity.
I may be being stupid, but my objection still makes sense to me, and the sentence fragment you have pointed out to me doesn't seem to change anything. Are you saying that brain-dead people don't have souls?
Edit: I think I finally figured out what this means. Sorry, I confused the meaning of "positive" and "negative" response.