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.

dxu comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, February 2015, chapters 105-107 - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: b_sen 17 February 2015 01:17AM

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

Comments (353)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: dxu 17 February 2015 01:28:08AM *  19 points [-]

I love how so many people are acting as though their pet hypotheses have already been confirmed (both here and on Reddit), despite the fact that the only evidence we've got at this point for most of those hypotheses is Quirrell's word. I don't know about anyone else, but this seems to me like a golden opportunity for EY to pull some sort of epic subversion of expectations and then lecture all of us about confirmation bias or overconfidence or something.

Comment author: RomeoStevens 17 February 2015 03:11:49AM 7 points [-]

Quirrell can even fool people IRL. Let's hope he doesn't escape the box of the fanfiction. Maybe writing the fan fiction installed him as a tulpa on EY's wetware.

Comment author: Quirinus_Quirrell 19 February 2015 06:43:41PM 7 points [-]

I am not a tulpa and am not (in this instance) running on EY's wetware.

Comment author: Lumifer 19 February 2015 06:55:50PM 2 points [-]

Slightly paraphrasing the immortal words of Mandy Rice-Davies, "Well you would say that, wouldn't you?" :-D

Comment author: DanArmak 17 February 2015 10:44:03AM 3 points [-]

Actually, that's already happened long ago. (Look at that user's post history.)

Comment author: ChristianKl 17 February 2015 04:12:33PM 1 point [-]

EY did write that it's not his intention to mislead readers.

Comment author: dxu 17 February 2015 04:15:45PM 2 points [-]

Not misleading readers, yes. Letting readers come to their own conclusion, which happens to be wrong, on the other hand...

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 17 February 2015 03:46:36AM 1 point [-]

I'm feeling somewhat reassured that my theory that Quirrell is evil is confirmed, but is there still room left for him to turn out to be benevolent?

Comment author: dxu 17 February 2015 04:17:52AM 3 points [-]

Seeing as HPMoR is in large part about pointing out how narrative logic doesn't work in reality, it seems plausible to me that even if Q == V, that doesn't necessarily imply that he's evil. (Well, I mean, he is pretty evil, but I'm not sure he's going to end up being the Big Bad of the story.)

Comment author: ReevesAnd 17 February 2015 02:39:42PM 4 points [-]

Following up on the idea of breaking narrative logic, might there not really be a Big Bad at all. Like, Voldemort has sobered up over the years and really just wants to be immortal. He'll go to great lengths to get there, but doesn't plan to destroy the world or anything. Just an idea.