Malice and Ulterior Motives

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 138822

> > 
> > Alla:
> > 
> > Erm... That is not what I said. " Snape killing Dumbledore 
equals 
> > Snape hurting his soul" does not imply that Snape should let 
other 
> > people die.
> > 
> > It only implies that Snape should not kill Dumbledore, IMO.
>  
> Hickengruendler:
> 
> However, what other choice did Snape have? Supposing he had not 
> killed Dumbledore, do you think all those other characters had 
> survived? In the end, not killing Dumbledore would IMO have been 
> equivalent with deciding to let more people die.

Alla:

Actually, I think we do NOT know that. During the whole HBP we saw 
how powerful Snape was since he was in school. I think that it is a 
possibility that if Snape attacked AT LEAST De who surrounded DD, it 
may have bought Albus a chance to do something - at least summon 
Fawkes for help.

Do I know that for certain? Surely I don't , but neither do I know 
for sure that Dumbledore was a goner in this scene from the 
beginning and I think Snape indeed owed Dumbledore to try and help 
him for all Albus did for him.


Hickengruendler:
 Because Dumbledore 
> would have died either by the Potion or through the hands of the 
> other Death Eaters anyway. 

Alla:

Well, as I said above my main disagreement is that we do not know 
for sure that Albus would have died anyway. I do not know that the 
choice Snape was making was between saving Dumbledore's life and 
saving other students' life ( Draco, Harry, whoever).

Right now to me it is absolutely equal possibility that choice Snape 
was making was between saving Albus and saving his own skin.

IF this possibility is correct, I absolutely despise what Snape 
chose.


Hickengruendler:
And then Snape, the one who urged the 
> other DEs to flee the scene, would have died as well for not 
> fulfilling the vow. 


Alla:

IF there was a slightest possibility that Albus could have survived, 
then yes, I think that Snape should have tried.

I mean, Snape is the one , IMO< who got himself into the taking vow 
and it would have been nice if he took a responsibility for that.




Hickengueldler:
And if there was noone to make them leave, they 
> could have done much more harm than they already did, to Harry and 
to 
> the other Hogwarts inhabitants, at least to those who were 
fighting. 


Alla:

Sure, it is a possibility, or  there is a possibility that Snape 
takes out a few, Albus does something and school is saved.


Hickengruedler: 
> There was no hope for Dumbledore in this scene, and I think both 
> Snape and Dumbledore knew this.


Alla:

But I don't know that. :-) Sorry.


Hicklengruendler:
 And if killing really splits the soul 
> and Snape was acting on Dumbledore's wishes, than Snape made in 
fact 
> a greater sacrifice than Dumbledore. On the other hand, this 
> selflessness does not fit his character at all. 


Alla:

Absolutely, IF Snape was acting on Dumbledore wishes. And I 
wholeheartedly agree with you - right now I cannot come up with ANY 
Snape's action in the book, where he was acting selflessly. I mean 
you can interpret some of them as such, but on each and every of 
them, selfish motivation could be given to, IMO.




Zgirnius:

> If you prefer an ethical worldview in which only adherence to a 
small 
> number of clearly stated ethical principles matters, regardless of 
the 
> likely consequences of one's actions to others or to oneself, you 
are 
> right. The ethical choice for Snape is to try as you suggest, and 
risk 
> failure with the consequences outlined above. However, if you 
prefer a 
> view of ethics which considers intentions and outcomes, the choice 
to 
> kill Dumbledore in order to save others (and others DD cares 
about, I 
> might add), *especially* since the death of Dumbledore might 
result 
> from *either* choice, can be defended.



Alla:

Actually to me "ethical principle" "do not kill", (unless in self 
defense of course) is very important one and yes, in my view of 
ethics, it matters very much.

I do like consider intentions and outcomes and that is why it is so 
very important to me that Snape would pay consequences for taking 
the UV in the first place which if I am very charitable, I look at 
as an enormous mistake and if I am not as 'deal with devil"

If Snape took this Vow under duress, that would be different story, 
but so far I am inclined to agree with Neri - that Narcissa nicely 
worked her charm on him and all Snape supposed loyalty to Dumbledore 
went out of the window. ( JMO of course)

I also do not believe that Snape took UV because he cared for Draco -
 because there was nothing to stop Snape from caring about Draco 
without taking Vow. He is his Head of the House after all.

So, since I think that taking a vow was a very wrong thing to do, 
IMO, Snape had to do anything to correct this mistake.

You would say he could not since he would die, right? Well, then my 
answer would  be that Snape knew what the consequences would be for 
failure to carrying out the vow ( he does instruct Bella what to do -
 so he knew  the mechanics, right?) and he got himself into it.

Nobody should pay for his foolishness ( and of course it is my 
opinion only that he was foolish) not Dumbledore, not Harry, not 
everybody else.

Snape made his choice - he took the UV earlier, so if consequences 
would have been for him to die on the Tower, I say he  should have 
done it.

As I said earlier - I believe that Snape is afraid of death and 
instead sent Dumbledore to his next great adventure.


JMO,

Alla