On Children and the "Other" (was:Re: On the perfection of moral virtues)

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 169516

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" 
<horridporrid03 at ...> wrote:
<SNIP>
> 
> Betsy Hp:
> I'm holding out hope that DH will show the "moral relativism" the 
> trio engages in as the problem that I think it is.  Dumbledore 
spent 
> all of HBP teaching Harry to look at Tom Riddle in a new way; to 
see 
> the man behind the monster.  At least, it seemed to me that he was 
> pleased that Harry was able to dredge up some sympathy for young!
> Tom.  And we also have Harry facing the fact that Draco feels pain, 
> both physical and emotional.  By the end of HBP Harry seems to be 
> holding on to that lesson.

Oh, was THAT the purpose of all that annoying and pointless filler in 
HBP?  The stuff that advanced the plot not at all except to introduce 
horcruxes?

The problem with charges of moral relativism is that the definition 
is, frankly, relative.  I guess that proves the point in a way.  Is 
it moral relativism for the trio to hex the Slytherins and it be good 
whereas for the Slytherins to hex the trio is bad?  Depends on what 
your morals are relative to.

If the trio were to decide "well, we don't like you <whoever> but you 
are okay if you are against Voldy," that is as "relative" a morality 
as one that says Gryffindors good, Slytherins bad.  It is in effect 
saying, "I don't care if you do whatever," yes, including abuse of 
children, "as long as you are on the right side."  Not a very 
laudable moral message, that.  In fact, I'd say it's downright 
contemptible.  

"Nice is not the same as good?"  Oh, yes, I think, it is.  Now, there 
is such a thing as the lesser of two evils (or three or six or five 
hundred).  But the lesser of two evils is still evil, and can't be 
called good.  It it is, or it is dismissed as morally unimportant, 
once again, I'd say that's contemptible.


> 
> Or you know, there's always the woodchipper. <bg>
> 

Sure.  And I suspect there will be more than a few people that want 
to use one.  Any messages sent in DH are apt to be contradictory, at 
the very least.  Or perhaps it will just devolve into preaching.  
<Shrug>  As I say, wood chippers are expensive, but less so than 
using the books as they should be if they end up approving of child 
abuse -- as bathroom equipment.


Lupinlore, who's willing to sell time on his woodchipper, and will 
even let you keep the mulch