= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, March 2015, chapter 118 - 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 (78)
It's a question I've wondered about myself.
Obliviation makes a big difference in terms of the horcrux network, but I'm not sure what difference it makes in terms of Harry's reluctance to kill humans.
If we assume that our future selves want all of us around because we're cute-- that is, delightful and harmless, will they want both Voldemort and Quirrell? Is it clear that Quirrell was Voldemort all the time?
Would they want to give all our past selves (say, a sample of each of us from every major psychological change) to be given a chance to grow and develop?
Will they be willing to kill each other in extreme circumstances because they won't be harmless relative to each other?
Thank you. Yes, my question was about the moral difference, not the technical one, as other replies seem to interpret it. I understand that Harry had to have precautions in case his transfiguration fails at some point, but still, he destroyed the identity of his mentor without an immediate need to do so. He could have delayed irreversible actions until he has time to reflect. Rather un-Harry-like at this point in the story. Unless I'm missing something.