Harry Potter And The Methods Of Rationality

I hadn't considered that. Quirrell still comes out with massive gains but it could be entirely incidental.

"Thinking Methods!Snape is not an extremely cunning and intelligent man is not something I would do,"

Oh he's cunning alright, but not on the level of Quirrell. At least in the very brief encounter between the two he was embarrassingly outgunned. I'm not going to count him out but he's not very high on my list right now until we see something of his go right. So far his only major scheme almost ended with total failure and his discovery if it weren't for Quirrell.

I love him in both universes, although I must admit that canon!Snape is just such a sad figure it's damn near impossible to not like him.

edited 10th Oct '12 3:19:27 AM by thatguythere47

Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?

Snape made the mistake of not preparing his ground properly. Not every Slytherin is a paragon all the time. Hell, look at me, 8-)

Besides, Quirinus is Tom Riddle reincarnate, apparently. He has therefore got an edge on anyone in this verse so far.

While, power-and-ability-wise, it does sort of point towards Quirrel as Voldemort Mark 2, I can't see why he'd be working so hard to convert/train Harry if he was. Volde obviously knows some, if not all of the prophecy in Methods, and assuming it hasn't changed*

then Volde knows that one of them has to kill the other. It's also obvious that Volde is in the school somehow, but my guess for who's hosting him is actually Trelawney.

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw

You see, I don't think Voldemort as anything other than a concept actually existed in this verse. Tom Riddle did. The name "Voldemort" in the story seems more like a label the witches and wizards could apply to someone so terrible as he was in his actions so that they could sleep at night, thinking themselves to be not as bad as he was.

And they built Azkaban. Bastards.

I think it's more like Voldemort was only ever a persona affected by Tom Riddle. Canon Voldemort was an evil bastard, but a very irrational evil bastard, who only managed to 'win' in book seven because the Ministry was just as stupid. Methods!Harry would wipe the floor with him, given seven years to do it in. Tom Riddle*

, on the other hand, is not the type to be pointlessly, irrationally evil, the way Voldemort does in canon; the degree to which methods!Voldemort displays those attributes can probably be assumed to be the degree to which Tom Riddle is playing a part.

Shinigan (Naruto fanfic)

Excuse me, Eliezer's actually confirmed in Author's Notes that, yes, Professor Quirrell is still Voldemort. Here's a copy of the author's note in question, if you're willing to scroll past the loud spoiler banner.

But, yes, it seems likely that Voldemort may not be quite as authentic in Methods as in canon.

Hmm. I'm actually kinda surprised no one is making much of a case for Quirrell as H&C2...

edited 10th Oct '12 10:41:04 AM by Exetera

Everything has a story.

I fail to comprehend. What does that achieve?

I disagree. One of my working hypotheses Tom Riddle is very much like Jojos Bizarre Adventure's Dio Brando: he is irrationally, violently, viciously and impulsively evil, and he's learned to outgrow that. He's become very patient, very systematic, but his main goal remains to unleash his utter domination over other people and break them to their will. I'd also hypothesize that they're both very much like Citizen Kane's eponymous Charles Foster Kane. All three have has an intense craving for love and recognition, but don't have any to give themselves.

The Hero/Villain scam Quirrell pulled was supposed to have that effect, and then he got faced with Marvel-verse grade ungratefulness and passivity.

In fact, this topic has been troubling me as of late. I've seen how incredibly passive and apathetic the youth at our University are to matters concerning... well, everything, but especially college-related politics, as I'm involved in that myself. How does one curb this kind of mass spinelessness, disinterest, despair, and disenfranchisement?

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

block1: As Harry put it in Chapter 40, "Dumbledore kills Draco, makes it look like I did it, and Lucius sacrifices his game against Dumbledore to get at me?"

block2: I have always assumed that Quirrell / methods!Riddle was exceedingly similar to methods!Harry save that a terrible childhood left him more cynical at a much younger age, and that his motivations were most likely either purely hedonic or similar to Harry's present motives for becoming a Dark Lord.

edited 10th Oct '12 3:47:36 PM by Exetera

Everything has a story.

Harry doesn't crave love or recognition or power, he's much more goal-oriented. Harry values the few friends he has, and protects them fiercely. Harry wants to

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

I still think both H&Cs are Quirrell. Quirrellmort, if he wants to make HJPEV the next Dark Lord, stands to gain a lot from taking Harry's allies and moral and political anchors from him. On second thoughts, though, why not just Depulso Hermione from the Tower, or just push her if there were wards to prevent that? It'd look like a suicide and Quirrell is plenty powerful enough to get the hell out of there or acquire a Time-Turner and set up an alibi.

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.

I understand Quirrell wanting to take moral anchors from Harry, but... Harry lost Draco Malfoy, his other helpful guide to the Dark Side, instead of Hermione, his actual moral anchor. This doesn't fit. I could see a way in which this could be a backfire of a Quirrell plan, but... it would be a very uncharacteristic backfire for him in that case.

I suspect that [a] the Hogwarts wards would either notice the "assisted suicide" or be able to prevent it, and [b] Dumbledore would definitely figure it out afterwards even if the wards don't tell him. It's worth noting that it also wouldn't bring Harry closer to the Dark Side; Quirrell would want Harry to lose his faith in Hermione before killing or banishing her.

edited 11th Oct '12 3:38:14 PM by Exetera

Everything has a story.

Quirrell is probably smart enough to realise that even if Harry thought it was likely Hermione was guilty in his logical contemplation (which he emphatically does not), it would probably take more than that for him to stop being her friend, especially in Hermione's extenuating circumstances. Quirrell's also not blind; he has to realise what Harry's teaching Draco, and even if not he wouldn't want Lucius (or anyone, for that matter) having leverage over Harry. Making himself Harry's only guide would be almost an instant victory. It was only HJPEV's blood-debt thing and threat to storm Azkaban/have the Wizengamot Kissed that screwed up the plan.

On the other hand, what does Snape gain from losing Lucius' trust, isolating Harry and gettin rid of Hermione?

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.

Snape is a tough read, because we haven't gotten much out of him. We're aware of what he's been involved in and who he has conspired with (for the most part, at least), but his actual motives have remained frustratingly opaque. This means that Snape could have conceivably benefited in any number of ways, making him a very attractive suspect in this case. For what it's worth, we also have plenty of reason to suspect that he's not beholden to Lucius Malfoy; falling out with the Malfoy camp may not be as much of a deal-breaker as his position would suggest.

tl;dr: Snape has a mysterious agenda and the wiles to pull off something like this.

To the best of my knowledge, Quirrell does not care about Lucius or Draco save to the extent that he seems to approve of Draco's influence on Harry and would rather that Lucius not kill Harry before he's ready to respond. He also seemed quite satisfied that Lucius would not be able to influence Harry through Draco. (I'd note, also, that if this really was a Quirrell plan that backfired the intent was surely to have Harry come to accept Hermione's erratic behavior before she kills (or attempts to kill) somebody.

We don't actually know Snape's goal. He's been by far the most mysterious character all story. I will, however, note that it doesn't appear Snape is going to lose face with Lucius over this; you can't predict every mad Mudblood's actions, after all... He will become less important to Lucius, of course, but that's not quite the same thing. (As I mentioned, he might also consider Lucius a source of interference rather than an asset.) He's also managed to gain rapport with Potter and fling a lot of mud on Quirrell. (In addition, though Snape is a competent plotter, I don't get the impression that he's quite as good as Quirrell. I could picture his plans backfiring.)

edited 12th Oct '12 8:04:44 AM by Exetera

Everything has a story.

It doesn't seem to me that Draco is doing a whole lot to tie Harry to the Dark Side, whereas Harry definitely seemed to be doing the reverse for Draco.

...eventually, we will reach a maximum entropy state where nobody has their own socks or underwear, or knows who to ask to get them back.

Not quite, Harry is moving Draco out of Intellectual Obscurantism, but Draco is moving Harry into Dark methods of political manoeuvring, manipulation, coercion, blackmail, rape-as-revenge, and so on. But, well, Harry's pull is much stronger than Draco's, so the former is much more dramatic than the latter.

By the way, to the readers of Methods Of Rationality, and to those of Less Wrong, I'd recommedn the film Beyond Silence. It's a very interesting exploration of intellectual obscurantism, blind nationalism, Us vs Them mentality, enemies not being some sort of evil mutant, Bad Science which is not Artistic License, and so on.

edited 12th Oct '12 9:19:49 AM by TheHandle

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

I agree that Snape is mysterious and that he could have a motive for disgracing Hermione, but we've no evidence for this and I can't think of one (if I've missed something obvious, please let me know). Snape does have an alliance with Lucius ("you have nothing Lucius desires more than my friendship") and remember that Lucius isn't exactly acting sensibly at the moment. Personally, I think Snape's most obvious motive is stamping down on Hogwarts bullying while keeping up his Evil Potions Professor thing, hence the setting-up of the SPHEW arc, Obliviating fifty-odd students, etc. As well as empathy for bullying victims considering his childhood, Snape also may want to prevent budding Slytherins from having bullying drive them to fatal errors like his.

edited 12th Oct '12 11:40:40 AM by LogicDragon

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.

I do like how the blood purists don't see any contradiction in their logic that mudbloods are supposed to be weaker and yet their pure-blood super-boy was defeated, twice.

I think there's a trope for that, but I can't remember it.

Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?

Logic Failure? Specifically I Reject Your Reality And Subsitute My Own?

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

The blood purists have their heads planted so firmly in the sand they're chatting with people in Australia.

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.

Not an unusual thing for humans to do.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

That was actually a good line there, dragon. I may steal it for my next signature.

Eh... Since Draco won the actual duel, I'd assume that he is actually stronger, if only marginally so. He lost the war battle because he foolishly exhausted himself, and then got almost killed only because he was ambushed after thte duel.

edited 12th Oct '12 12:03:21 PM by Exetera

Everything has a story.

That, and he had never faced Hermione genuinely angry before. You wouldn't like her when she's angry.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

"Since Draco won the actual duel, I'd assume that he is actually stronger, if only marginally so."

Perhaps my memory is failing me, I thought he exhausted himself and then got KO'd because of it?

Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?