Evaporating soul pieces ( was Re: Why 4 Horcruxes left, and not 3?? )

[ronnie]

No: HPFGUIDX 142282

 > bboyminn wrote: 
> > To imply that the soul-pieces 'evaporate into thin air' implies 
that
> > they are gone relatively quickly. It's difficult to say how much 
> > time it took Tom to create each individual Horcruxes (re: time 
> > between murder and creation), but it seems clear that it took 
him a
> > significant amount time to create the original Diary Horcrux.

expectopatronnie:

You have a point there. Maybe the 'evaporate into thin air' was not 
a good phrase. However, what I do mean to say is that the torn soul 
piece will never be healed. 

> bboyminn wrote: 

> Also, we must to some extent blend real-life with fictional life. 
> If a person commits murder and that tears his soul, and that soul  
> piece is lost, then from a religious sense, can that murderer 
> never be redeemed?
> From a Christian perspective, even the worst of us is
> capable of achieving salvation, but how is salvation possible if 
> you have lost part of your soul? Again, I know that's not proof, 
> but it is a least an indicator. 

Expectopatronnie:

Well,for lack of evidence on both sides, let us go into our 
philosophical assumptions: being Jewish, I don't take the so-
called "real-life" christian perspective. Not going into the 
question of JK's attitude towards Chrisian morality, I *don't* 
believe in a murderer being fully redeemed.
Being a psychologist, I believe that there is no full recovery (or 
healing) from trauma, even if you have no responsibility to the 
trauma your soul suffered (e.g. Harry, Lupin, Snape - whom I suspect 
has AKed well before the tower scene). Note - that does not mean 
that the person is Doomed.It simply means to me that every 
murderer's soul is damaged beyond repair. So when you say:  
 
> > So far in JKR's Wizard World, we have only one thing 
that /seems/ to
> > destroy the soul, and that is the Dementors. Of course, I can't 
> > really say that with absolute certainty. In general though, the  
> > soul is eternal.


(expectopatronnie again):

I totally agree with you. Only a demenor's kiss will destroy your 
soul, but any AK will damage your soul irreversibaly.
 
> bboyminn: 
 
> I do, personally, believe that given substantial amounts 
> of time the soul is capable of repairing itself. 
> While given decades of time and a substantial 
> change of heart, the soul may, 
> to some extent, heal itself, it will always be scarred and damaged 
> by the action of murder. 

To this I agree. But IMO from Rowling's POV, the tearing of the soul 
is irreversable. The person learns to cope without this certain 
piece. 
 
> Geoff wrote:
 
> My view is that it is analogous to the situation in the real world 
> with physical injuries. If a person has an accident and, say, 
> breaks their back and becomes paralysed,
>  their back is still there. It is not able to function properly 
> but is still a part of them. 

expectopatronnie:

Lending your analogy, I'd say that what happens to a soul after a 
killing is sort of like brain damage. The non-damaged parts of the 
brain may learn to cope and make-up for the lost functions. However, 
the damaged tissues will never function again. 

expectopatronnie, philosophizing at noon.