Slytherin/ the use of Unforgivible Curses/ HP Worthwhile

[mlfrasher at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 33624

Hello! Hello fellow list members!

alexander Lomski replied to my comment about DA and the "ends justifies the 
means" argument:

 >Ahh, interesting. Does the end justifies the means or not? I could talk 
LONG about it - after all I was raised in the country that considered the 
only possible answer as "YES!"... :)

LOL.  I still have to look at it on a case by case basis.  I LOVE my grey 
areas.  So much fun to muse over than the black and whites! ;)  I still 
contend that using the Unforgivable Curses is not the only way to go.  
Although I'm always intrigued by DA, perhaps simple *because* it's a no no.

>About Dark and Light, I can do nothing but cite one of my neighbors - "And 
remember! We are the forces of Light - but not necessarily Good!".

Argh!  Who is this?  I'm drawing a blank!

>Still from what I have read so far, Avada is the most potent combat spell in 
Potterverse. From purely historical point of view, it's strange it was 
forbidden at all - I cannot remember any examples in history of peoples 
declaring a potent weapon illegal. Perhaps Wizards have stronger sense of 
ethics than we mere humans... unlikely.  The fact that they are 
"unforgivable" curses doesn't mean
the least for me - that's just the term in Wizard's Law to describe them, 
IMHO nothing more.

Well muggles have declared weapons illegal, or recognized that they needed to 
be forbidden in many circumstances.  Here are a few examples that come to 
mind.  The Kellog-Briand Pact 1928 which was initially signed by 15 nations 
and eventually ratified by 62, aimed for the "renunciation of war as an 
instrument of national policy".  The Washington naval conference of 1921-22 
limited and scrapped much of the naval arsenal of the Pacific powers. (i.e. 
Five power and four powers treaties).  And then there were the provisions of 
the Versailles Treaty that limited Germany to a skeleton military force.  I 
don't think I need to mention that these were an obvious failure, but the 
point is that throughout history, there have been attempts to destroy or 
limit the use and manufacture of hazardous materials.  This is why I put the 
Unforgivable curses (UC) in the field of nuclear weapons (which are probably 
more applicable for this argument and there have been more restrictions in 
this area) and other big bang for little buck ticket items.  

You can say that ethically it's up to the person who uses the curse/weapon, 
but some things are so horrible that no matter who uses them -- you are 
automatically put in the arena of public opinion.  I can't think of an 
instance where kedavara was used and someone said, "Oh what a great idea!"  
The impression I get is that it's so bad, people don't even like to mention 
it, let alone use it.  There have been constant reminders throughout the 
series that curses like AK and much of the DA aren't widely talked about 
(except in hushed tones or for ppl specially trained in them - far and few) 
and students were shocked when Moody said he was going to teach them.  Heck, 
the Weasley's aren't even allowed to walk down Knockturn Alley.  

>Don't forget that on the war, some of ethical laws cease to function 
(primarily the taboo to kill).

I'll argue that this depends on the culture.  Ethical standards vary from 
region to region and a dip on one culture's 'standards' might *be* the 
standard for another.  Similarly, as in the case of Manifest Destiny, many 
cultures didn't even consider that there were ethical guidelines in the 
regions they conquered, and vice versa. 

I think for Harry and the wizarding world there's an absolute power issue.  
You know - absolute power corrupts absolutely.  Voldemort feels that it is 
his right to decide who lives and who dies, and that's the strongest power to 
have over an entire populace.  *That's* tyranny to me.  So, I could easily 
see why UC aren't widely taught. Although not teaching them leaves the 
average man/woman quite unprepared.  Know thyne enemy.....

Tabouli declared:

>Ahaa! Here we have it! A mere day or two after my musings on utopianism, an
illustration burgeons forth! (and one that looks suspiciously like something
carefully prepared in advance and launched into the list to shock us out of 
our
Satan-driven denial).

Hear hear!  I felt that it was a baited attempt to provoke a reaction.  

garaeta (short for Margaraeta, as there has been some confusion over my 
gender ;)





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]