Re: This shall be Salman Rushdie´s words (Spoiler????)!?

[Miles]

No: HPFGUIDX 156552

Neri wrote:
> (If you really really insist on the logical proof, then:
>
> A = Snape is good
>
> B = Dumbledore is dead
>
> The four logical options are:
>
> 1. A and B
> 2. (Not A) and B
> 3. A and (Not B)
> 4. (Not A) and (Not B)
>
> Rushdie's argument: If A then Not B
>
> Since JKR acknowledges Rushdie's argument as true, this means option 1
> is false.
>
> However, JKR adds that B must exist and therefore options 3 and 4 are
> false too. This leaves as valid only option 2: Snape isn't good and
> Dumbledore is dead.
>
> Q.E.D.)

Miles:
Your prove is based on the assumption of a logical connection of both.
But we don't know there is. Both options can simply coexist, without any
logical connection we can be sure of.
Just to take the example most of us make of Rushdie's statement: "Snape is
good, because he helped Dumbledore to fake his own death" is very likely,
but far from being 100% sure. ESE!Snape could have helped Dumbledore to gain
his ultimate faith, still being on LV's side.

Coexisting factors that *seem* to be logically connected are the base of my
favourite statistics joke:
In German speaking countries, storks are said to bring all newborn children
(I'm not sure this "legend" is inter-cultural).
Statistical analysis of  scientific research tells us, that areas with more
storks have more newborn children p.a.
Q.e.d. ;)

So, the only thing we can sure about is, that Dumbledore is dead and will
remain dead. Everything else is still possible. And since this "else" is one
of the most important secrets of book 7, Rowling would never ever spill the
beans about this.

Miles, giggling and hoping that all listies understand the joke above, not
so much hoping that they think it is funny ;)