HP and the Methods of Rationality 1.666: Now is the time to bring all good threads ..

[keybounce]

Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality (http://hpmor.com/) is an alternative-universe story telling the events in Harry Potter canon from a different point of view.

Discussion has gone on in two different threads now, so we've had 1 and 1.333; hence, this is now number 1.666.

Different people have different takes on the values presented in this story. Some people think that the "Harry Potter" character is the author's mouth piece; others points out that while more than half of the chapters are from Harry's point of view, those chapters that are from the viewpoint of other characters have a very different tone/style to them.

Feel free to discuss the science presented in the story, the characters' flaws (each one has plenty), or just plain "this author completely altered canon for his own purpose".

[Tyndmyr]

Spoiler train ahead, choo choo!










Now that that's outta the way, just in case, my favorite character in the book is Quirrel. Fairly few characters get fully fleshed out, and in the case of most, there's a lot of reliance upon the original text to define characters. Quirrel's one of the few that ends up vastly richer in characterization than in the source media, and I greatly enjoy intelligent villainy. Far too many villains fail because they grab the idiot ball firmly with both hands, and that always detracts greatly from the satisfaction of the resolution. I prefer my villains smart, and preferably with some sort of convoluted plan or goals.

[keybounce]

Absolutely.

Quierrel almost, *almost* manages to make it to the end as a sympathetic mis-cast good guy.

Remember, as a snake he tell Harry that the plan is for Harry to rule magical Britain. Not a lie at all. Same as "I expected him to dodge". He's trying to make Harry into the best dark lord possible, and will accept the best light lord possible as almost as good.

The idea of a united magical world that can stand up to Muggles? When Muggles threaten to destroy everything? As he points out, the Dark Lord did not want to rule over ashes.

And, remember also: It was only at the end, after he read the science books and started to understand where it was all going to go that he said "Teaching this guy is going to cause massive trouble". Prior to that, he was happy to teach Harry; after that, it was "No, I've changed my mind, I'm not going to teach you".

The whole "I have to kill him, and this long quidditch game is the best cover to do so" was not his plan until after he found out that (A) he can survive on transfigured unicorns without setting off any alarms, (B) Harry was actually a threat. Prior to that, as much as he wanted the stone of permanence, he realized that he wasn't going to get it in this current body. It was only after Harry gave him the ability to last long enough. I mean, Harry had already given him the secret of the resurrection stone so that Quirrel was no longer stuck with "this one body until someone else stumbles on another of my early horocruxes".

[pendell]

My favorite character also. I loved his idea of the perfect Christmas gift


Hire an assassin to take out one of the giftee's enemies. This christmas give the gift ... of DEATH!


It's kind of sad that the villain is the most interesting person in the story, but there you have it.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Epinephrine_Syn]

Quirrel Spoiler
As a nitpick, Quirrel "is" kind of a solid all around good person and hero in the story (from the little we know), he just gets possessed by ol' voldie and remains so until a very brief moment before his death.

[Lethologica]

The story is fundamentally about Harry and Quirrell, so it's not surprising that they receive most of the development.

Still, it has to be said - Quirrell grabbed the idiot ball with both hands by letting Harry keep his wand for the final exam.

[Tyndmyr]

Nah, you're only an idiot if you make bad choices with what you already know.


I disagree. Attempting to take Harry's wand would have provoked the final struggle early. Quirrel's goal is to make the terms of the final struggle as one sided as humanly possible. There's no reason for him to risk an early confrontation that might result in some outside element spoiling his plans. Keep in mind that he is, with exceptional thoroughness, attempting to avoid a particularly awful outcome. He is taking no chances whatsoever, no matter how small.

He loses only because he didn't have any idea that the thing Harry did was even possible. Such a loss is possible for anyone, and as he doesn't know of it, he doesn't know that the wand is key. Remember, wandless magic is possible, so merely removing his wand and provoking a conflict would introduce other risks.

Note that if he'd known it was possible, he would have absolutely been victorious.

[Douglas]

Still, it has to be said - Quirrell grabbed the idiot ball with both hands by letting Harry keep his wand for the final exam.
In addition to what Tyndmyr said:
Harry with his wand is naturally going to try to use his wand to do something. That means Voldemort can focus his primary attention on watching the wand, and for Harry to do something without getting caught at it he'd have to use wordless motionless non-aimed magic - which is a very restricted category that Voldemort quite reasonably believed didn't include anything Harry knew how to do other than speaking in Parseltongue, much less something capable of defeating over 30 Death Eaters plus Voldemort before they could even react.

Harry without his wand is cornered with no obvious channel for any way to deliberately attempt to resist. Voldemort would have no idea what to watch out for. Worse, it's practically a textbook case of a situation likely to result in accidental magic by Harry, and with prophecy involved it would be more than usually likely for whatever he accidentally does to result in a successful escape.

[Lethologica]

Nah, you're only an idiot if you make bad choices with what you already know.


I disagree. Attempting to take Harry's wand would have provoked the final struggle early. Quirrel's goal is to make the terms of the final struggle as one sided as humanly possible. There's no reason for him to risk an early confrontation that might result in some outside element spoiling his plans. Keep in mind that he is, with exceptional thoroughness, attempting to avoid a particularly awful outcome. He is taking no chances whatsoever, no matter how small.

He loses only because he didn't have any idea that the thing Harry did was even possible. Such a loss is possible for anyone, and as he doesn't know of it, he doesn't know that the wand is key. Remember, wandless magic is possible, so merely removing his wand and provoking a conflict would introduce other risks.

Note that if he'd known it was possible, he would have absolutely been victorious.

Quirrell correctly disarmed Harry to begin with, because giving your enemy tools is a bad idea, because it risks him using those tools in ways you weren't prepared for. Indeed, had Harry been allowed to think of the solution before EY's designated Final Exam time, he would have done it shortly after restoring Hermione to life, rather than relying on his gun. Which, by the way, further answers your objection - Quirrell deliberately provoked a conflict in order to remove a protection from Harry, so it cannot be said that Quirrell rationally delayed conflict as long as possible. It would have been better to provoke any additional conflict over the wand immediately, after Harry had used his best idea and before he could come up with any more. (E: Assuming letting Harry have his wand back in the first place was a good idea.)

Not only is it generally correct to avoid handing your opponent his capabilities, it's especially true in this specific case, because Quirrell knows Harry is prophesied to have "power the Dark Lord knows not." And that fact is even in Quirrell's conscious mind, because he asks Harry to tell him about that power. Yet Quirrell holds off and gives this world-threatening menace with unknown power time, and access to magic, because he wants Harry's power more than he fears Harry's threat, despite everything he correctly said before.

The possibility of wandless magic (E: or accidental magic) does not introduce other risks, because it can be performed whether or not Harry is holding his wand. It is a risk that exists regardless of whether or not Quirrell lets Harry have his wand back, or for how long Harry gets to keep it. (E: This is also why "Harry with a wand will naturally try to use his wand to do something" is wrong. If Harry has his wand and a non-wand solution, he will naturally use his wand to distract from the non-wand solution.)

This all adds up to Quirrell needlessly multiplying risk with every second Harry has his wand.

[Douglas]

Quirrell correctly disarmed Harry to begin with, because giving your enemy tools is a bad idea, because it risks him using those tools in ways you weren't prepared for. Indeed, had Harry been allowed to think of the solution before EY's designated Final Exam time, he would have done it shortly after restoring Hermione to life, rather than relying on his gun. Which, by the way, further answers your objection - Quirrell deliberately provoked a conflict in order to remove a protection from Harry, so it cannot be said that Quirrell rationally delayed conflict as long as possible. It would have been better to provoke any additional conflict over the wand immediately, after Harry had used his best idea and before he could come up with any more. (E: Assuming letting Harry have his wand back in the first place was a good idea.)

Not only is it generally correct to avoid handing your opponent his capabilities, it's especially true in this specific case, because Quirrell knows Harry is prophesied to have "power the Dark Lord knows not." And that fact is even in Quirrell's conscious mind, because he asks Harry to tell him about that power. Yet Quirrell holds off and gives this world-threatening menace with unknown power time, and access to magic, because he wants Harry's power more than he fears Harry's threat, despite everything he correctly said before.

The possibility of wandless magic (E: or accidental magic) does not introduce other risks, because it can be performed whether or not Harry is holding his wand. It is a risk that exists regardless of whether or not Quirrell lets Harry have his wand back, or for how long Harry gets to keep it. (E: This is also why "Harry with a wand will naturally try to use his wand to do something" is wrong. If Harry has his wand and a non-wand solution, he will naturally use his wand to distract from the non-wand solution.)

This all adds up to Quirrell needlessly multiplying risk with every second Harry has his wand.
That intentionally provoked conflict did not threaten the prophecy - he baited Harry rather than threatening or attacking him. It is the prophecy that Quirrell feared, not Harry on his own.

Harry using a wand to distract from a non-wand solution is a possibility only if the non-wand solution is deliberate action, or at the very least something Harry is aware of before everyone else is. This is definitionally not the case for accidental magic. Prophecy-augmented unpredictable accident was a threat Quirrell cannot meaningfully prepare for, but can try to prevent by avoiding the circumstances that would be likely to produce it. Harry using his wand was a threat Quirrell believed he understood well and was on guard for. Accepting the well understood threat in order to prevent the unpredictable wild card is a reasonable decision to make. Quirrell was simply wrong about his understanding of Harry's wand-using threat.

Also, Voldemort may have thought that, if whatever "power the Dark Lord knows not" Harry possessed were actually dangerous enough to be worth worrying about, Harry would have used it already.

[Lethologica]

That intentionally provoked conflict did not threaten the prophecy - he baited Harry rather than threatening or attacking him. It is the prophecy that Quirrell feared, not Harry on his own.

Harry using a wand to distract from a non-wand solution is a possibility only if the non-wand solution is deliberate action, or at the very least something Harry is aware of before everyone else is. This is definitionally not the case for accidental magic. Prophecy-augmented unpredictable accident was a threat Quirrell cannot meaningfully prepare for, but can try to prevent by avoiding the circumstances that would be likely to produce it. Harry using his wand was a threat Quirrell believed he understood well and was on guard for. Accepting the well understood threat in order to prevent the unpredictable wild card is a reasonable decision to make. Quirrell was simply wrong about his understanding of Harry's wand-using threat.

Also, Voldemort may have thought that, if whatever "power the Dark Lord knows not" Harry possessed were actually dangerous enough to be worth worrying about, Harry would have used it already.
If baiting Harry does not threaten the prophecy, then taking the wand would not threaten the prophecy. If you mean simply that Harry could at some point refuse and force Quirrell to kill him, thus threatening the prophecy, that was true of everything else Quirrell did. There is no reading where taking the wand is uniquely problematic - which should be obvious, since Quirrell had already taken the wand once that afternoon.

I have yet to encounter any source saying that children with wands are more or less prone to accidental magic than children without wands, which seems to be a necessary premise of your "Quirrell let Harry keep his wand to reduce the likelihood of surprising accidental magic" hypothesis. However, honestly, I don't consider the accidental magic hypothesis likely or interesting enough to spend further energy discussing it. If you want to think that Quirrell was seriously basing his judgments on the likelihood of accidental magic, go for it - I have absolutely no interest in persuading you otherwise, even if I think you're obviously wrong.

Similarly with the hypothesis that on this point of all points, Quirrell had dismissed the threat.

[keybounce]

So how many of you manage to come up with an acceptable solution to the final exam problem?

I messed up my idea -- I confused neutrons with neutronium. I had the less-dense neutrons, which would not act as a sufficient shielding layer.

[Lethologica]

I was on the LW thread and it was absolutely filled with partial Transfiguration, so more of that seemed pointless. I couldn't figure out another solution, though - I just threw some hopefully-helpful ideas at the wall and left it at that.

This (https://web.archive.org/web/20161114233024/http://freetexthost.com/ikucx6nse4) is my favorite solution.

[TheFallenOne]

Remember, as a snake he tell Harry that the plan is for Harry to rule magical Britain. Not a lie at all.

I was surprised Harry never called him out on the "snakes cannot lie" thing. That may make Harry's own words reliable, but not the other way around since Quirrelmort in preparation for this final confrontation could have modified his own memories to be able to lie with the promise of truth. The thought should at least have crossed Harry's mind, especially considering they did exactly that in order to fool the mirror.

Plus, pointing that out would have the added bonus of making Quirrel at least minimally dubious of the veracity of his own thoughts.

[keybounce]

I was on the LW thread and it was absolutely filled with partial Transfiguration, so more of that seemed pointless. I couldn't figure out another solution, though - I just threw some hopefully-helpful ideas at the wall and left it at that.

This (https://web.archive.org/web/20161114233024/http://freetexthost.com/ikucx6nse4) is my favorite solution.

That was wonderful.

I'm not sure about the time turner trick though. It requires two games, one is an 8-letter, 26 per, name finder; the other is a ... exhaustive search of every codon in all 46 chromosomes to find the pair, assuming that it is a single-letter (note that the author's note for that chapter, at the start of the next chapter, points out a number of other possibilities, as well as discussions of that chapter originally pointing out that a pair of genes, one doing the muggle/squid/wizard, and the other a master on/off, was also a possibility as it prevented accidental mutation from enabling a wizard outside of magical britain .. and I'm sure there were even more ideas discussed as well. In any event, something has to account for strength of magic separate from existence of magic.). Since they are different lengths, with different numbers of potential trips, I don't know that they would play out like that or not.

Still, the whole idea of "There's a spell to get rid of the possibility of paradox and force a real answer" is just ... just perfect!

And I really, really loved the whole papercut from the newspaper concept. Why else would the interaction between them affect Quirrel so much worse, except that he could be killed by Harry and not the other way around.

That ending actually does a better job of tying loose ends together.

Unfortunately, my concern is that with the interdict broken, really powerful magic + scientific thinking will result in Harry's other unbreakable vow being broken.