Heroes and Not - What should Snape Have Done?.

[Constance Vigilance]

No: HPFGUIDX 145313

Pippin said:
> 
<snip>

But this is where 
> the wording comes in. 
> 
> There are *two* tests:
> Should it prove necessary
> If it seems Draco will fail
> 
> It's a  nice little problem in Boolean algebra, a logic
> puzzle like the potions obstacle in SS/PS.
> 
> We don't  know the conditions under which the first 
variable 'necessary'
> is true. We also don't know the relationship between the
> two tests. Is it logical AND or OR? Do both conditions
> have to be true, or is it enough if one of them is?
> 
> Since we don't know that, we don't know whether Snape isn't 
> dead because he kept the vow, or because the conditions 
> under which he would have to keep the vow or die weren't 
fulfilled. 
> 

CV: There is actually another problem with the nice little boolean 
algebra. There is no time limit stated in the vow. If he had vowed 
instead "I promise I will not kill Dumbledore" and then he did it, 
it would be a broken vow and he would have to suffer the 
consequences. But his vow was more along the lines of "I promise I 
will kill Dumbledore" (simplifying the vow for purposes of 
argument). How is the bind to know when that might happen? He did 
not promise to take the first opportunity to kill Dumbledore. He 
didn't even promise to kill Dumbledore IMMEDIATELY after Draco 
failed to do it. Couldn't he stall the vow bind indefinitely by 
continuing to *intend* to do it *eventually*? If I were Snape in the 
same position, that's what I would do.

~ Constance Vigilance