= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
jimrandomh comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, February 2015, chapter 108 - 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 (352)
Muggle research in the 2010s has revealed much about what actually makes people happy, and how often people are deceived. The best way to find out is with one of those mood-tracking cell phone apps, which eliminate the biases of memory. Quirrell doesn't have that, but as an approximation, I searched the PDF for the word "smile", which appears 310 times in chapters 1-106, and the word "enjoy", which appears 32 times. What did I find?
Interacting with Harry makes Quirrell happy. Moreso than killing idiots. Moreso than teaching Battle Magic. Killing him would be a grave mistake.
The book is mostly from Harry's perspective, so I would expect some selection bias in searching for interactions that make Quirrell happy, since most of the interactions described are with Harry as the protagonist. I agree with your conclusion though.
That quote is from chapter 74. I mention this because you didn't specify and to save the trouble for others to search.
Too bad the 2010s haven't happened yet.
We haven't seen him kill idiots, so we don't know how happy that makes him.
From his perspective, Firenze would have been an idiot, and killing him didn't result in any visible sign of happiness.
Eh, Firenze was taking initiative to dispose of a major problem even if it required actions he considered morally distasteful. Compared to Quirrell, he's pretty dumb, but he hasn't distinguished himself for idiocy the way, say, the Ministry official who took self-destructive joy in obstructing him did. If anything, he probably distinguished himself as cleverer than the norm, if not in any way a peer.
On the other hand, Firenze's mistake was going into self-indulgent rambling instead of just killing the person he wanted to kill (especially with the stakes apparently as high as the survival of the universe). I get the feeling that Voldemort, who had his own Evil Overlord List, would find this particularly distasteful.
Well, given his actions in the past he can hardly call this idiocy worthy of being killed. Also, Firenze was not annoying him by being an idiot, he was annoying him by threatening Harry, for whom he had other plans.
As far as I understand, Quirrell believes (or claims to believe) that killing Harry will put him one step closer to fulfilling his CEV. Thus, any amusement Harry could provide is to Quirrel kind of like as ice cream is to us mortals: a minor, fleeting, and ultimately inconsequential pleasure.
I wouldn't extrapolate that research onto someone who is capable of murder and torture. I'm not sure though, and this is an interesting point - does everyone derive happiness from altruism?
There are at least two alternative interpretations.
1) Quirrel said this while he was roleplaying as the defense professor. Perhaps the role he came up with happened to be constructed so that Harry's actions made him happy. But that doesn't mean that it made Riddle happy (insofar as the "true" identity of Riddle exists). Heck, we don't even know that Harry is dealing with Riddle in chapter 108, or yet another identity that Riddle selected for the occasion. (He "changes names as you or I change clothes.")
2) Even if Quirrel/Riddle was not roleplaying, this could have been a calculated statement made in order to gain Harry's trust and admiration. There seems to have been a lot of that going on in Harry's interactions with Quirrel.
Having Quirrell kill someone wouldn't count as them cheering him up deliberately.
When Lord Voldemort was feeling down, Bella would bring him chocolate and idiots to kill to cheer him up. I don't know why it never worked.