Values of Potterverse WAS: Re: muggle baiting vs/Being good and evil

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 155235

> Alla:
> 
> > No, right values like opposing the ideology 
> > that one group of wizards for some reasons is 
> > better than another group of wizards
> 
> houyhnhnm:
> 
> Real tolerance is indeed a virtue.  I see little evidence 
> of it in wizard society, which seems to me to be pervaded 
> by an ingroup/outgroup mentality.  Defining the ingroup 
> by the particularly stupid criterion of "blood" purity 
> may be less prevalent among those on the "good" side, 
> but then they have other prejudices:  Gryffindors vs 
> everybody else, British vs. foreign wizards, wizards 
> vs. other magical beings.  I don't see tolerance as a 
> value of the WW on any side.

Alla:

Sure, WW needs to be more tolerant, I guess where we differ is that 
I consider "pureblood superiority" to be the worst one, if for no 
other reason that only Voldemort supporters want "muglleborns" to 
die.

Every other form of prejudice except prejudice to non-human races 
seems to be not so life-threatening to me.

Bad, don't get me wrong, but not life threatening.

And I absolutely think that *good guys" whom we see close and 
personal are much more tolerant ( I mean members of the Order) than 
other side, I think they are used as an example, sort of.


> Alla:
> 
> > saving people from death for selfless purposes,
> > like risking your life while saving innocent man 
> > from terrible fate
> 
> houyhnhnm:
> 
> Harry and Snape (whom you don't consider one of the good 
> guys)  Who else?

Alla:

Nope, not Snape, for whom I still have to be convinced of "selfless 
purposes". That would be Harry, Hermione, all kids who went to fight 
with Harry to save him and Sirius, that would be members of the 
Order who came to MOM for the same reason saving lifes for selfless 
purposes IMO.


 
> Alla:
> 
> > standing up to the dark wizard
> 
> houyhnhnm:
> 
> But you have to leave the dark wizard out of it because 
> my question is what goodness do the "good" in the 
> Potterverse show besides opposing Voldemort.  When 
> Voldemort is finally defeated how will good behavior 
> be distinguished from bad behavior? 

Alla:

No, I do not **have to**, because to me standing to Voldemort means 
standing up against the values he wants to implement.

And when he will be defeated , hopefully WW will at least start to 
move towards more tolerance, kindness, etc.


> Alla:
> 
> > like being friends with "dark creature"
> 
> houyhnhnm:
> 
> I have often wondered what would have been the attitude 
> of Peter, James, and Sirius toward Lupin had they 
> surprised his secret and had he *not* been a member 
> of their House.  Would they have been friends with 
> him then or would they have persecuted him?

Alla:

LOL. The canon is that they **were** friends with the "dark 
creature"". Any canon support for your assumption that they would 
have persecuted him?


 
 
> Alla:
> 
> > And then yes, breaking the rules ( especially if they 
> > are done for noble purposes
> 
> houyhnhnm:
> 
> What was the noble purpose of Fred and George when they 
> tested their skiving snackboxes (designed for the sole 
> purpose of allowing students to get away with playing 
> hooky and to make F&G money, of course) on first years?  
> What was the Marauders'noble purpose?


Alla:

But of course when I said "for noble purposes" I meant Trio hunting 
the stone, going to Chambers, saving Sirius. Would you like more 
examples?

As to what was noble purpose of Marauders (poorly executed of 
course) - that is very easy - to relieve the sufferings their friend 
was going through on the monthly basis.

In my book - helping your friend - is the good thing to do.

JMO,

Alla