Did JKR cheat with the prophecy? No Cigar

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 124892


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" <bob.oliver at c...> wrote:
 
> Steve said:
> <SNIP>
> > 
> > Locally, a great and reliable Prophet has made a prophecy that effects
> > me, ..., but doesn't prevent me from choosing.... The Prophet is the 
> > weatherman and the prophecy is 'freezing rain tomorrow'. 
> > ... that prophecy ... effects the choices I ... make, ... but 
> > ...it has (not) restricted my free will. 


> Lupinlore responds:
> 
> Because that isn't a prophecy.  It's a prediction based on certain
> methods that are not 100% accurate.  A true prediction is one that
> happens to be right.  A true prophecy, on the other hand, is an actual
> glimpse of the future, which is something else entirely.  


bboyminn:

Ooowww....close ...very close ...but no cigar.

You see, you might have a point if the item under discussion was
'prophecies' but it's not, it's 'choices' and how they are or aren't
resticted by prophecy. The question at hand isn't do or don't
prophecies exist or the nature of prophecies, it's do or don't choices
and freewill exist in the face of a prophecy. 

My 'Freezing Rain Prophecy' was an illustration. It serves as a model,
an analogous parallel, used to make a point. And that point is, that
everyday in everyway in real life our choices are limted and
restricted by foreknowledge of the future. 

So, does the Prophecy effect the choices of characters in the book?
Does it restrict their choices? Yes, but so does the weather, so does
the climate, so does geography, so does having kids, so does being
married, so does the kind of car your drive, so does the physical body
fate has cursed or blessed you with, so does the talent that fate has
curse or blessed you with. BUT in no way does any of this, including
the prophecy, alter freewill.

Your view that somehow life/fate/destiny restricts or limits Harry or
Dumbledore's choices isn't some highly unusual occurance, but the
normal course of everyday life. Life always restricts our choices, but
rarely does it dictate them.

By the way, I'll pit my weatherman, who /does/ predict the future,
against Sibyll** Trelawney any day. At least my weatherman, flat out
says 'rain tomorrow'(who, what, where, when, and why), he doesn't
couch his predictions in vague, esoteric, ambiguous words that are
highly subject to interpretation.

(** Oops, we've been spelling her name wrong; it's Sibyll not Sybil.)


> Lupinlore continues:
> 
> It is true that the weather prediction does not absolutely restrict
> your choice because it is a calculation that does not depend for its
> validity on the future being fixed.  The prophecy, however, DOES
> depend on the future being fixed.  The first, you are right, does
> not deny Free Choice. ...
> 

bboyminn:

'Rain tommorrow' does not depend on the validity of the future being
fixed? Rain tommorrow means rain tommorrow, how much more fixed can
you get than that? What does 'neither can live while the other
survives' mean? How fixed is that? 

You say, "The prophecy ... does depend on the future being fixed", but
how is the future fixed? That Prophecy is filled with vague indirect
language that is highly subject to interpretation. It doesn't flat out
say who, what, when, were, and why; it says sort of who, kind of what,
presumably when, vaguely where, and we can only guess as to why.
That's not a very fixed future. 

All we can /assume/ is that Harry and Voldemort's futures are
intertwined. Harry, if we /assume/ it's about Harry, CAN defeat the
Dark Lord, /assuming/ that means Voldemort, but it doesn't say he
will. More importantly, it doesn't say how or when he will; assuming
all the assumptions we've already assumed. 

The prophecy is vague and indirect enough that it is highly subject to
interpretation, interpretation that starts with a long list of
assumptions. Final choices made are based on assumption (which are
choices), which lead to interpretation (which are intellectual
choices), which in turn lead strategic analysis (the weighing and
discarding of choices), which in turn leads to decision (which are
choices), which in turn leads to actions (which are based on narrowing
a long list of choices).

By your own statement, "you are right, (it) does not deny Free
Choice". Well, if free choice and freewill are not denied, then what
is it we are discussing? If freewill and free choice are allowed, then
haven't we resolved our debate?


> Lupinlore concludes:
>
> Sorry, but IMO, ..., your argument is  based on a false premise and 
> simply does not stand up to the test of analysis.
> 
> Lupinlore

bboyminn:

Well, I might be persuade to yield if this were a discussion about
Prophecies vs Predictions, or example vs illustration, but it's not.
It's about choices vs no choices, freewill vs no freewill, fixed
destiny vs malleable destiny. Exactly what is the /fixed/ destiny
stated by The Prophecy? Everything about it is based on assumptions
and interpretations which are all a form of choices. 

So, back to the basic premise, how is the future fixed, and how are
our choices limited beyond the way that they are always normally limited?

Choices ...effected-yes; dictated-no.

Steve/bboyminn
Who think Prophecies are almost as much work as time-turners.