[HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's importance and threats of expulsion

[Troels Forchhammer]

No: HPFGUIDX 57207

At 09:15 07-05-03 +0000, Steve wrote:
>--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "karmakaze_kk" <sarudy at y...> wrote:
> > Harry always thinks he has the best and most urgent reasons to break
> > the rules, but he does break them left and right.  It's an attitude
> > that says "I think I know what is important better than the people
> > who make the rules", which qualifies as "disregard" for me.
>
>bboy_mn:
>
>I don't think you will get much support for this position; some, yes,
>but a lot, no.
>
>In the past, someone wrote a long essay on the stages of moral
>development, and pointed out that, as strange as it may seem, obeying
>the rules is a very low stage of moral development. Sometimes
>disregarding the rules is the morally correct thing to do.

That it is sometimes necessary to break rules in order to do
the 'right thing' should be obvious to most, but claiming
that obeying rules is a low stage of moral development is,
IMO, a morally reprehensible statement. Rules are created
to allow a society to function. Disregard the rules and you
destabilise the society - it really is that simple!
Creating and maintaining complex societies are, IMO, a
victory for human morals. The realisation that we must
submit ourselves to the common rules to make that
society work is perhaps the highest moral state humanity
has yet achieved. The next step is when the rules become
unnecessary.

Normally minor transgressions can be absorbed without
problem while more serious transgressions are punished, but
if enough people start to do minor transgressions it can
have seriously damaging effects for the society. Therefore
rules should be followed for moral reasons, unless there
are compelling /and/ commonly acceptable reasons not to.
In most cases bad laws shouldn't be broken, but people
should rather attempt to change them. Extreme cases where
the laws/rules are used to supress people are naturally
excepted from the above discussion.

>Harry, dispite his occassional mischief, has very high moral
>character.

Normally, yes. Or at least - the books are written from
that standpoint (I don't always agree with the books on
what is right).

>  The does what is right; he does what must be done, even if
>it goes against the rules.

The problem is that he also often breaks the rules for
reasons that are selfish or downright stupid - not very
moral there.

PS-9: The Midnight Duel. Breaking school rules just to
get a chance to pursue a personal vendetta.

PS-14: Norbert the Norwegian Ridgeback. Breaking both
wizard laws and school rules to help a criminal whom he
happens to like.

CoS-5: The Whomping Willow. Theft, breaking the
International Statute of Wizarding Secrecy (the very
reason for the Ministry of Magic) and probably also the
Decree for Reasonable Restriction of Underage sorcery.

CoS-12: The Polyjuice Potion. Hiding information from
the Headmaster because he fears it might make him look
bad - even /after/ he's had Dumbledore's assurance that
he is not under suspicion.
Using illegal means to spy on Malfoy who they suspect
just because they don't like him (OK - Hermione is the
one who suggests this).

PoA-2: Aunt Marge's Big Mistake. Blowing up Aunt Marge
was an accidental act caused by emotional stress, so
I won't count that.

PoA-10: The Marauder's Map. Going to Hogsmeade for fun
even after he has realised why he was certain to be
prevented from doing it. Repeating it after Christmas.

PoA-16: Professor Trelawney's Prediction. Going down
to Hagrid as if they were the only ones capable of
comforting him.

I think that'll suffice. Harry apparently has grown a
bit in GoF - at least he isn't quite as much the
rule-breaker in that one (there's some faked homework,
at least one hex in the corridors and perhaps some
other minor things).

<snip>

>I don't at all see Harry viewing himself as above the rules. He takes
>the rules as serious or probably more serious than the other students.

Perhaps he doesn't, but he repeatedly acts as if he did.

>It's just that Harry's life is far more complex than most other
>students. He is faced with complex situations that other student will
>never have to face. I would say that his rule breaking that falls into
>the catagory of mischief is probably on par with his classmates.

Nope!
His transgressions are worse that most. Stealing and flying the
car in CoS and going to Hogsmeade in PoA are the worst cases.

>So does he disregard the rules? Yes, but mostly when the rules need to
>be disregarded.

Those cases are not - to me at least - what is important here.

>Remember, blindly and unquestioningly obeying the rules is a very low
>degree of moral development.

But breaking the rules knowingly and for some personal fun or
satisfaction is even worse.
Rules should always be questioned, but very rarely should they
be broken. Rather bad rules should be changed. The idea that
you're allowed to break a rule or the law because you think
it's bad is, IMO, a sign of excessive egoism.

>Remember what Dumbledore said (I paraphrase), many times in life
>you will be face with choosing between what is right and what is
>easy. Let's hope you will always choose what is right.

I'll remind you that what is right in that case is actually
upholding the laws, while the easy way out is letting
Voldemort and cohorts run roughshod over any rules they
don't like (like e.g. that you're not allowed to kill
Muggles).

Troels