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.

buybuydandavis comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, July 2014, chapter 102 - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: David_Gerard 26 July 2014 11:26AM

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

Comments (370)

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

Comment author: buybuydandavis 28 July 2014 10:08:43AM 0 points [-]

You can see it that way, and I largely do too, but that was not how Harry and Quirrell identified the problem.

No continuity of ... sself, you would go on thinking after making the horcrux, then sself with new memoriess diess and iss not resstored -

The issue, the reasons for the issue.

If we avoid those reasons, which dying in the transfer does, then the issue is resolved.

Comment author: Velorien 28 July 2014 12:41:30PM 2 points [-]

I think you've got it the wrong way round. The first part is the problem. The second part is how the problem manifests itself.

Let's take the full quote.

"No continuity of -" there wasn't a snake word for consciousness "- sself, you would go on thinking after making the horcrux, then sself with new memoriess diess and iss not resstored -"

The problem is continuity of consciousness. What Quirrell is saying is that because there is no continuity of consciousness, when you die, you die, no matter that you made a horcrux first.

I certainly don't believe that Quirrell, who has probably spent much of his life considering the problem, would be so naive as to think that destroying the original somehow gives the copy continuity of consciousness with the original.