[HPforGrownups] Different Magic, Different Rules (was Re: Voldemort killed personally?)

[Jordan Abel]

No: HPFGUIDX 157220

Lupinlore:
> All very true.  However, I think the whole question of whether using
> the Basilisk constitutes a personal murder misses some points.
>
> [the most common variety of magic] operates according to certain
> rather precise and dependable rules

Random832:
Or, at least, everyone supposes it does. Which is what really matters,
as i'll explain below

Lupinlore:
> Here, [in what we'll call "spiritual magic",] intention, feeling, and thought seem
> much more important whereas technicalities and logical hair-
> splitting recede (not disappear completely, but recede).  In other
> words, I strongly suspect the important thing about making a horcrux
> is the intention to make a horcrux

Random832:
It seems somewhat clear that intention is important in all magic -
that Ron could use the incantation to levitate a feather to levitate a
club simply because he _believed_ it was simply the incantation to
levitate anything and _intended_ to levitate the club makes that clear
enough.

Lupinlore:
> Similarly, I suspect the thing that makes
> Unforgivables unforgivable is that they aren't technical
> performances but in effect dark religious rites -- the intent to
> kill or hurt or control and to kill or hurt or control for a
> particular set of reasons is what is ultimately important.

Random832:
I don't think there's _any_ excuse for them to be "unforgivable" in
the sense that they are: the state does not have the right of
forgiveness in the first place to withhold. This seems, to me, just
yet another example of how thoroughly corrupt wizarding society is.

They're unforgivable because the ministry can't regulate them - better
to put people away without trial on suspicion of using them.

-- 
Random832