Ethics, Schmethics

[pippin_999]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Mike & Susan Gray"
<mikesusangray at y...> 
wrote:
> OK.
> 
> So, I think there's lots of nice, Christiany-ethicy stuff in HBP.
All well and dandy. But honestly, folks:
> 
> Is it right to get people (and basically innocent people at that!)
drunk so they'll divulge information they wouldn't other divulge?
> 
> If so, is it also right to force turth serum on them? (Which
Dumbledore admits to doing to Horace.)
> 

Pippin
Hold on! In the first place Harry doesn't "get" Slughorn drunk. That
was entirely Slughorn's choice. It's not like Harry spiked his punch
or put him under Imperius, or like Slughorn is unfamiliar with the
effects of alcohol.  

Secondly Dumbledore doesn't admit to giving truth serum to Horace

"I would be astonished if he has not carried an antidote to
veritaserum with him ever since I coerced him into giving me this 
travesty of a recollection." HBP-US 372 ch 17. 

Whether Dumbledore tried veritaserum or not, Slughorn would know 
very well that his travesty of a recollection has not fooled 
Dumbledore, who must still be after the memory, and 
*could* resort to veritaserum to get it. 

What Dumbledore admits to is coercion.

Coercion encompasses intimidation as well as outright force, and
we've seen Dumbledore be intimidating.

"On the other hand, I would advise you, Lucius, not to go giving 
out any more of Lord Voldemort's old school things. If any more
of them find their way into innocent hands, I think Arthur Weasley,
for one, will make sure they are traced back to you..." -- CoS-US
337 ch 18.

Dumbledore doesn't threaten Malfoy with manufactured evidence,
he barely hints at  the possibility and lets Lucius's imagination
do the rest.

A word or two from Dumbledore in the wrong ears and Slughorn's 
ability to collect suppliers of velvet smoking jackets and
crystallized pineapple  could well dry up. Dumbledore
wouldn't have to be so crude as to point this out. Sluggy already
knows it.

But  whatever form of coercion Dumbledore tried, he didn't resort 
to a stronger one when it failed.  He put away the stick and offered
a carrot instead; the chance to "collect" Harry Potter.

So why doesn't DD make a moral argument against using VS?
Because he knows that a practical one is likely to carry far more
weight with Harry and his friends. There is a supply of VS
in the potions classroom, and it would be best if team
Harry  is not tempted to use it. Hermione, for one, has a
tendency to judge her means in the flattering light of  her ends.


Pippin