muggle baiting vs. muggle torture

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 155252

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" <celizwh at ...> 
wrote:
>
<Snip>
> 
> houyhnhnm:
> 
> Right values such as lying, getting drunk, stealing, 
> disrespecting parents, breaking rules just for the fun 
> of it, cheating on homework, hexing people because they exist?
> 


Or right values such as abusing your students because hey, you're on 
the good side and they need to learn some life lessons, anyway?  Or 
standing by and ignoring said abuse because you're the epitome of 
goodness and have the right to determine who suffers for their own good 
and the good of your plan?  As Alla rightly said, this cuts every which 
way, even to people whose names start wiwith "S" end in "E" and 
have "NAP" in the middle, or whose names bring to mind white 
bumblebees.  

Regardless of how you come at it, this gets at one of the fundamental 
questions of ethics, indeed THE fundamental question: Are good and evil 
ultimately arbitrary definitions or is there some consistent and 
explicable principle underlying such determinations?  Of course, what 
REALLY gets the whole thing complicated is that if you believe there is 
an underlying principle, then the question is whether THAT principle is 
arbitrary or in some way defensible by something other than 
authoritative pronouncement.

Personally, I think that in practical terms, questions of ethics almost 
always come down to questions of authority.  That is, they don't so 
much involve what's right and what's wrong as they involve who has the 
authority to set those definitions.  Even an appeal to utilitarianism 
begs the question of why a given person in a given situation should 
care about the greatest good for the greatest number.

In terms of the Potterverse, I doubt there will be a consistent theme 
or underlying principle that can be shown to run through every case.  
Often it probably will come down to some arbitrary definition, which 
may not be particularly consistent from case to case.  Is muggle 
baiting bad?  We may get the answer (probably tacitly) that yes, it is, 
except for Dudley and the twins, which is a situation of naughtiness 
but not really badness.  Why?  Well, Dudley had it coming.  Why does 
that differ from DEs?  Because I say so. Will JKR be in the right if 
she does that?  Don't know, muggle baiting isn't my issue, but people 
will certainly take firm stands on it.

Although, on the other side, I doubt we'll get quite such a cynical 
answer as David Eddings once (very amusingly) put in the mouth of his 
sorceror Belgarath:  "Good and Evil?  I prefer us against them.  It 
keeps the sides straight and doesn't keep us up all night arguing 
metaphysics."


Lupinlore