Did JKR cheat with the prophecy? No Cigar

[slgazit]

No: HPFGUIDX 124984


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" <bob.oliver at c...> wrote:

> Because you simply can't have a prophecy if the future ISN'T fixed
> into a particular pattern (which may include branch points, however as
> the branch points are themselves fixed it does, by certain of the
> rules of formal and symbolic logic, boil down to the same thing. Even
> quantum indeterminacy is actually more formally known as quantum
> determinacy in certain kinds of discussions). I'm afraid a discussion
> about prophecies vs. predictions IS a discussion about fixed future
> vs. free will.

Prophecy in fantasy series is a tool to setup the unsuspecting hero
and the people surrounding him to some climatic ending (Robert
Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series is another example where the orphan
hero is the prophecied saviour of the world, completely unbeknown to
him, how he (gunk, it's *always* a "he", never a "she"...) evolves
into the role, with prophecies playing a central part; even Lord of
the Rings has some prophecies involved, e.g. Aragorn and the King of
the Dead).

I think that prophecy is not so much an inescapable setup where no
matter what the person does, the result is foretold. It is more a
guide to all involved. It limits everyone's choices, and clarifies
their roles. But by their literary nature, prophecies are cryptic,
vague, can be interpreted in many different ways and, in both the
Harry Potter saga and the Wheel of Time (and probably other similar
stories I haven't read), the fact that the people involved - on both
sides - generally interpret them incorrectly (including the hero
himself), is an integral part of the story. In that respect, I believe
the role of the prophecy is also to affect the outcome by its very
existence. The fact that people know the prophecy changes the way they
act - something like quantum physics - the presence of the observer
affects the behaviour of the observed elements...

on the whole, a prophecy does not force the events. People reach where
it leads through a series of personal decisions and seemingly
inevitable conflicts. They have a choice to not accept their role and
act accordingly - that choice usually leads to the dark side victory,
so of course the noble hero ends up taking the right path. But the
prophecy doesn't tell them that they are bound to win nor provides any
practical advice on how to get there or what the cost to the hero of
taking that path will be. The climatic battle may be foretold, but it
gives no clue to the hero as to what he needs to do. Interestingly in
both the Harry Potter saga and the Wheel of Time, the hero is
completely outgunned by the evil lord he is supposed to vanquish. In
HP's case, it is clear that intensive study in his remaining years at
Hogwarts, while usefull, is not what will lead him to defeat Voldemort
who was much more knowledgable and experienced, even when he was
Harry's age, let alone many decades later. In that respect, the
prophecy does not tell Harry anything new. It only serves to quash any
expectation that he can somehow compromise or evade the conflict with
Voldemort.

Salit




  Predictions are based on calculation made from a
> certain point in time given certain assumptions that have to be worked
> into your equations.  Prophecies are based on direct perceptions of a
> future that is fixed and will come to be (or more formally a certain
> pattern of branchpoints which is fixed, with certain branches
> disappearing as further perceptions of the future reveal which
> branches will become actual) - that is the very definition of a
> prophecy (or of a true prophecy, anyway, which is what DD, anyway,
> thinks he's dealing with).  Another way of putting it is that if true
> prophecies exist the branches that become actual don't depend on free
> choices made at those branches.  Rather the pattern of branches itself
> arises due to the fact that the prophet doesn't have a clear enough
> vision to percieve which branches WILL become actual.
> 
> Actually, we are steering VERY close to Frank Herbert here, as the
> entire metaphysics of the DUNE series is based on the difference
> between calculation of the future (i.e. prediction) and direct
> perception of the future (i.e. prophecy) and what that means for
> choice and free will.  Herbert, in turn, based a lot of his
> metaphysics on the discussions of predestination found in in the
> writings of formal theologians such as Augustine, Aquinas, and Edwards.
> 
> But, at his point, I think the discussion is exhausted.  This is the
> type of thing that ends up going round and round in arguments of ever
> greater complexity until everybody ends up with a migraine.
> 
> You think she hasn't cheated because free will and prophecy can exist
> together (prophecy and prediction are rather similar).  I think there
> is no way she can't have cheated very badly because prophecy and
> prediction are qualitatively different things and true prophecy by
> definition rules out the existance of free will as it is commonly
> understood.  Fair enough.  Let's shake hands and move along.
> 
> 
> Lupinlore