Humanity, Kant, Caricatures, and Draco (was Re: Real child abuse)

[Marg McKay-Lowndes]

No: HPFGUIDX 146247

 
 

Betsy Hp: 
 
   
> And yet, Draco doesn't attack in a vacuum.  He *doesn't* instigate.  
Harry has just insulted his mother.  So Draco does have motivation, 
and rather noble motivation as well (as any schoolboy can tell 
you).  Not that Draco is pure as the driven snow.  He did insult 
Molly.  But this isn't a case of Draco launching an attack out of 
nowhere.> 

 
MML here: 
[MML] Yees, Harry has just insulted Draco's mother, who happens to be a
Death Eater, full of hate and venom, with the only redeeming feature being
her desire to save her son from a woeful fate.  In other words, in seeking
to insult the Malfoys, Harry has a plethora of material to draw from. I
think in analysing the characters in the book, it is wise to look beyond
mere actions, and really closely examine motive and the moral stance which
each character takes ("It is not our actions which determine who we are
Harry, but our choices" :- Dumbledore said this somewhere, not sure whether
in movie and/or book, but nevertheless for me it sums JKR's attitudes
towards her characters). Put simply, Harry is fighting for the good, Malfoy
is fighting for the evil (pure-blood wizardry) and it is this moral stance
which renders their actions right or wrong.

CHeers
MML who has no idea where this fits into Kantian philosophy.