Privet Drive / Ethical Legilimency /

[arrowsmithbt]

No: HPFGUIDX 102686

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sp. sot." <griffin782002 at y...> wrote:
> 
> I disagree. I think that as in the real world, ethical wizards generally 
> raise their children to be ethical, unethical wizards generally raise their 
> children to be just like them, and every once in awhile a child rebels one 
> way or the other (Mrs. Black ended up with Sirius; the Weasleys, it appears, 
> ended up with Percy.)
> 
> It isn't always obvious. Crouch Sr. would probably be horrified at the 
> suggestion that Crouch Jr. was like him, but they both seem to hold the idea 
> that The End Justifies The Means -- it just came out a little different in 
> Junior than in Senior.
> 

This could raise all sorts of hairy issues. For example - are the ethics
of the WW the same as ours?

It could be argued that they're not - as evidenced by the (assumed) 
acceptance of Snape's treatment of his students and the existence of
House Elves (though like many I suspect that we're missing key pieces
of information).

There are some ethical rules. The use of the Unforgivable Curses are 
one - but they only apply when the curses are aimed at another human;
presumably Elves, Goblins, Centaurs and Giants don't count. (Now why
this limitation? Is this another clue to future events? Highly likely IMO.)

Would you consider that DD's treatment of Harry has been ethical?
Dumping him on a family that can't stand him, keeping him in ignorance
for years, even after he is brought back into the WW. It's true that he
claims this was for Harry's own good, so that's OK then. Until you
remember what DD is about - the destruction of Voldy -  and Harry
is the way to do it. Harry is what circumstances have made him and
most of those circumstances have been engineered by DD. There's
an argument for believing that DD  had a good idea before the event
that the Godric's Hollow disaster was a strong possibility but did nothing
to prevent it. So we have Weapon!Harry, forged by DD to further his 'plan'. 
Isn't that a case of the ends justifying the means too? Probably yes; that's
perhaps why DD seems to suffer such agonies of remorse occasionally.

Even in the Real World some think ethics can be modified in exceptional 
circumstances - a war, for example, when the ultimate prize is quite
literally life or death. But this isn't the Real World we're talking about, it's
a make-believe society. And I for one am quite happy if they play by
different rules. In fact, it makes it all that much more interesting; I can
say "Ooh! That's nasty!" with barely supressed glee and not be bothered by
comparisons with the standards of my own society.

A half-way decent work of fiction (especially fantasy) expects you to accept
the precepts laid down by the author. If you don't, either the book doesn't
work or you're in the wrong genre. Trying to impose other standards
would be like putting your shoes on the wrong feet - they don't fit and
you don't feel comfortable. Better to relish the differences IMO.

Kneasy