Circle Arguments, Ego-Maniacs, and Manipulators

[Melody]

No: HPFGUIDX 45452

Well, I promised I would continue with my line of reason so....

If I knew where to begin tonight, I would.

Both camps haves stationed their tents and neither party is sending
out a lone rider to try and reach a quiet truce.  True, neither side
is attacking the other with a bloody battle field reflecting in the
armor, but the strong feet of followers are pulsing the ground and
causing many to be rather silent in the hopes all will just pass away.
So I, in my infinite desire to talk until all is sorted, cannot let
this stalemate away.  So because I am not the general of the army or
even the strongest soldier, I hope my little voice will not shame
either side.

Before my last thoughts were...
<<I guess that is my question and point.  Where is the fine line in
the sand?  What is hypothetical and what can legitimately be deduced
behinds the paragraphs of Harry Potter?>>

I said that because that is where PC and MD seem to be divided.  PC
believes MD has gone too far.  My question is to PC is...this is a
magical world, how can we ever go too far?  Ok I know that is not
fair.  PC has a valid point, or two, ;) to make.  We can all go too
far sometimes.  Let our imagination run away with us.

Like Hagrid Poppins.  We all found that idea adorable and quite funny,
but tend to throw out as a possibility since we do not have *canon*
evidence that his umbrella, or any umbrella for that matter, has that
power.  It is just an idea floating around.

I still do not see how MD is based on a floating idea.  GulPlum states
that it is a circular argument.  I disagree.  An idea is born from
impressed emotions, and is kept alive by support.  If one does not
accept the "reputation" of the support from the beginning, then the
idea will never be proven to any satisfaction to a second party.
There is nothing the idea-maker can do to convince the second party
either.  Both sides must shake hands and leave the ring.

This is where the use of _The_Bible_ as an example fails and yet
somehow shines in GulPlum's post.  It shows us that if we do not
accept the canon as canon, then there is not point in arguing.

Unfortunately for both sides, we all take the HP series as, and I do
not mean this blasphemously at all, "The Bible" for our ideas.  We all
have accepted this universe and have familiarized ourselves with the
characters.  Therefore, to say that MD is a circular argument is mute
in my mind.  You may not interpret the ideas a certain way, but it is
not a circular argument since we all accept the "reputation" of the
series.

If you do not accept the premises of MD, then that is fine.  PC was
created for that purpose.  To create unity of defense against MD.  It
reminds me of the nobles of Scotland shaking their legitimate
documents arguing that they have the right to the throne.  Both sides
can't win and neither is conceding.

And having said all that and boring way too many listees...
I do want to pose a few questions.

bugaloo37 wrote:
>>IMO, Voldemort is a ego-maniac-who in certain areas is unable to
admit the possibility that something he has strove so hard to
conceive may backfire on him. Some might say he learned his lesson
when the AK aimed at baby Harry backfired on him-but perhaps, he
hasn't. If we make a comparison between Voldemort and certain real-
life ego-maniacs, we will see a pattern. IMO, history shows us the
ego-maniacs seldom learn from their mistakes and more times than not
it is this "blindness" that finally defeats them.<<

Me:
Do you really find him to be an ego-maniac?  While I do see him
running away in his own brilliance, I do not see how this has consumed
him.  He seems quite calm in the Riddle house and later in the
graveyard.  Cracking a few jokes, taking his time.  He has all his
emotions in check until all breaks apart when the wands react.

I do see how Voldemort is suffering from over-confidence in himself.
That is what got him stripped of his body.  He relied too much on his
own knowledge and power, but he seems to be more careful in his steps
now.  Pre-Harry Voldemort and Riddle Voldemort did forget some of the
finer points of *good* magic (love and phoenix tears).  Graveyard
Voldemort just did not think of *all* possibilities.  He got caught on
a wand technicality.

So confident, yes.  Bit careless with his emotions, no.


Now on to Dumbledore...
Alla wrote:
>>>Yes, it would be foolish for Dumbledore not to have a game plan,
but (in my opinion) the preparations which Dumbledore probably made
did not include the Voldemort return. Metathinking or not I am not
ready to accept very gray, almost dark Dumbledore of MAGIC DISHWASHER,
especially if I think that such possibility almost flat out denied by
the canon.
"You flatter me," said Dumbledore calmly. "Voldemort had powers I
will never have.
Only because you're too-well - noble to use them". (PS/SS)
Of course Dumbledore has to prepare to make some sacrifices being a
leader in the horrible fight and all, but I think that willingly (and
in my opinion unnecessary) forcing Voldemore to return will lead to
too many sacrifices, which Dumbledore is not going to make.<<<

Me:
It is hard being a leader when you have to make hard choices.  It does
not negate the fact though that they must be made.  Manipulator
Dumbledore does paint the picture of a man who is controlling way too
much and relying way too much on his intuition alone.  By that
definition, he is Voldemort.  Now, I don't think that is what MD is
stating.

One quote from Barty Jr. that sticks out in my mind.  (GoF, Ch. 35)
"Decent people are so easy to manipulate, Potter."

Granted, that quote is from the evil perspective, but I think it
applies well to the good.  Decent people are easy because they do
raise their glass to the higher level of ideals.  I do not see the
harm of assuming someone's actions and working accordingly to bring
about good for the better of the community.  Dumbledore is doing just
that.  Without being omniscient, Dumbledore can still accurately
predict what others will do.

This is what MD is stating.  Not that he is manipulating, but rather
observing the actions and morals of those around him and making
decisions and judgments from what he observed.  It is a fine line, but
one, I believe, that Dumbledore, in all his brilliance, is walking.


Melody