Could be that the spells/device/etc. only works on words that are already a taboo. This might also explain why Voldemort put effort in making people fear his name.

You could argue that the Unforgivables are already taboo, but that's in sense of using the curses, not in uttering their names or incantations.

 

It doesn't matter what Dumbledore said, we will go witht he evidence that we have. Also, we are not talking about prophecies here. The rest of explanation is actually redundant for me because that is how I explain it to people, I might have said the exact same thing in another thread, maybe that is why I didn't explain it in this thread.

For me, your argument, is basically an explanation of what I already know, and then a different conclusion. But whether that conclusion is justified or not, that is the question.

Basically the time travel follows Novikov self consistent principle, whatever the person does cannot change how the incidents happened. There is no split timeline like you said. So even before Harry decided to go back in time, it was decided that he will go back in time. Even before he decided to go back in time, it was decided that he will go back in time. Isn't that predestination? Does Harry have a choice to not go back in time? If he doesn't, how is that not predestination? Everytime someone picks up a time traveler, it is already decided whether they will use it or not. How is that not predestination? Whatever happened in past had to happen the way it happened, what about the future? We know one aspect of future in a certain scenario is predestined, whether someone will use the time turner or not...but what about the infinite other ones?

 

I'm not following, why wouldn't Harry still have a choice? He had no idea he saved himself, so that wasn't a reason he had to do it. We don't know what would have happened if he decided not to go back since he did (he'd probably be kissed so he couldn't go back, which is also consistent... I think).
So basically the univere went: suppose Harry survived, would he decide to go back in time not knowing he saved himself. If yes, he lives. If not, he dies. Which is basically the opposite of predestination, no?

Perhaps this is why you should make sure you're not seen: if you are seen, current!you knows you are going back to the past sometime in the future and the possibility of paradox occurs: what if after seeing yourself you decide to not go back?

 

You have missed the principle, there is only one timeline, for Harry to get to the point where he decides whether to go back in time or not, he needs to be saved by his future self. No alternate timelines here, just one timeline. Also, I didn't say Harry doesn't have a choice, no rules are established by the author, we can only speculate whether he does or not. Also, if he doesn't decide to go back, or waits for 5 minutes more, there will be two Harry facing each other. If Harry still doesn't decide to go back in time, there will be two Harry. They can create a whole fucking army of Potters.

What does "so basically the universe went" mean? After this, you are begging the question, first you say suppose Harry survived, and then go on forgetting that you supposed something in order to try and prove predestination is not possible. Fallacy. How will Harry survive without the help of future Harry?

Also, please go and read about Novikov Self Consistent principle, there is just one timeline, Harry being kissed will not be consistent.

 

That kind of logic leaves the option of paradoxes wide open, which HP doesn't appear to have, given the prevalence of time travel to the point where schoolchildren can use it.

EDIT: Ninja'd.

 

The timeline having to remain consistent does not necessarily lead to predestination.

Try to stop thinking in terms of linear time and strict determinism. Imagine the timeline to act more like quantum structures. An entity governed by quantum rules is entirely undetermined until it is observed. It's not that we don't know it, it quite literally does not have an absolute state. Once observed it becomes locked into a stable minimum energy configuration.

The same could be true for timelines in Harry Potter. Before a moment is reached it is entirely undetermined, anyone could make any choice. Once the moment has been observed then it is fixed.

So, yes, I suppose as soon as he saw himself at the lakeside his choice to travel back in time was 'fixed'. But it didn't have to be, there are a lot of ways for a wizard to look like James/Harry Potter from a distance. Any of those ways could have been present and the loop would have remained consistant.

Basically, as the Doctor would say, timey wimey.

 

First of all, I am not thinking in terms of strict determinism. I mention the possibility of duplicating yourself. Also, it's a work of fiction, anything you want is possible. You can say different types of time travels are possible, but that doesn't mean they are happening. We have decide on the basis of what happened to determine what kind of time travel it is, what kind of time travel the author intended to use. Right now, it's Novikov Self Consistent principle.

There are a lot of ways to look like James/Harry. But that doesn't disprove my point at all. SO what you are saying is that if Harry didn't go back in time and saved himself, or went back and didn't save himself, a wizard looking like J/H would have saved Harry? So Harry's survival is "fixed?" For any of those ways to be present, those guys had to be present too nearby to save him in case Harry doesn't. What you are saying is not feasible, we have no evidence for that in the book, and even if it's possible, Harry's survival is still fixed. But anyways, in Harry Potter, alternative timelines are not happening. The author gives hints that time travel is according to NSCP, Harry saving himself, incidents at Hagrid's Hut.

In terms of choice, think of this....Harry went back in time, all the actions of past Harry are determined, are they not? They can't be changed, there are no alternative timelines in Novikov SCP. Doesn't that reek of predeterminism? If future Harry decides to go and talk to past Harry, or try and change what past Harry does, the actions past Harry takes are the ones the future Harry would have remembered taking. This is verified by the incidents happening in the book. Please read about Novikov Self Consistent Principle.

 

Why would that reek of predeterminism? Isn't predeterminism the concept that everything is decided by something (God) and that humans have no free will? From what I understand of the wikipedia page of the NSCP it makes no mention at all of predeterminism. Just that events will happen in such a way that there are no paradoxes.

My problem is what gave rise to the timeline: Harry could only go back in time because he went back in time. It's consistent, sure, but so is 'Harry gets kissed by Dementors'. So why is it the 'Harry goes back in time and saves himself'-timeline that happens and not the simpler timeline of 'Harry gets kissed, the end'?

 

It's a nuance of time travel and is more accurately called the Predestination Paradox. Effectively it means that the actions of future!Harry caused past!Harry to go back in time in the first place, and that removal of one or both actors from the loop would cause a paradox.

Given that paradoxes don't seem to have happened despite the existence of time travel (you can tell by the way the universe still exists), this follows the Novikov Self-Consistency Principle.

One is more entertaining than the other?

Really, the only in-universe answer here is 'because it happened that way'. It's like asking why World War I happened instead of the 'simpler' solution of not going to war. It just did.

 

And what evidence is that, exactly? A time travel mechanic that was never fully explained? I already stated that a void of information contradicts nothing, nor does it support anything. You're not looking at the facts. You're using some of them to arrive at a conclusion you already had.

Prophecies don't matter and aren't binding, the only reason this one mattered is because Voldemort believed it to be true: fact.

The only evidence in the entire series for predestination is the fact that the prophecy did technically come to pass, if you look at it as Voldemort being ultimately undone by Harry, instead of it being Voldemort being ultimately undone by himself (which would contradict the prophecy, and is the main reason why he was destroyed).

But one instance of a prophecy coming true isn't enough. We're told that plenty of prophecies never come to pass at all, and others are subverted entirely. Prophecy seems to be less of a vision of the future, and more of a vision of one possible iteration of future events.

If anything, the nature of prophecy in the Harry Potter universe is a strong argument against predestination.

 

Perfect example of strawman argument. What Dumbledore said doesn't matter because we are not talking about prophecies! I mentioned it right after the line you quoted! We are talking about the nature of time travel in Harry Potter and whether it reeks of predetermination. Does the speech of Dumbledore mention anything about time travel? Does it? If not, how does it matter what it says about prophecies! Why are you bringing prophecies into it? Please show me where I have written the existence of prophecies proves predetermination. Stop being redundant Lord Raine.

Both myself and Aekiel have mentioned and explained the nature of time travel as we understand it, if we are wrong, please correct us. But stop using ad hominem and strawman arguments. I gave my counter argument to your post, provide your counter arguments to that.

 

You realise that this kind of holier than thou shit really doesn't win any points outside a structured philosophical debate?

First, I would say that while our impression of events is apparently consistent with NSCP that does not mean that this is the rule being followed. An alternative would be the many-worlds interpretation mixed with the anthropic principle with just a dash of narrative causality.

Or, in other words paradoxes can happen, and they do break everything in a rather impressive way. But there are no characters to observe and no story to follow in those situations and thus we can only read about a situation which doesn't result in a paradox. 'And then a paradox happened, and the universe stopped existing' would be an amusing end to the books, no doubt, but I can't see it every being much of a possibility.

Second, even if we do decide that NSCP seems to make sense in our example. NSCP is heavily tied to the laws of physics and makes an assumption regarding T-symmetry. Magic breaks physics, NSCP assumes the laws of entropy are the same in areas containing closed time loops but the presence of magic seems to stick the middle finger at physics at the best of times. Who can even guess what horrible contortions a time-turner subjects the space-time fabric to.

Assuming the HP-verse is Einsteinian. It may make more actual sense as Newtonian or even Aristotlian. Magic certainly seems Aristotlian. NSCP doesn't really apply in those cases. Hell, basic logic doesn't even apply really.

Third, lets go all out and say that HP-verse is almost identical to our universe. Magic is some kind of quantum effect that manipulates probability to produce apparently miraculous effects. Things not technically impossible, but so totally unlikely they would never ordinarily occur during the lifetime of a universe.

Then we're pretty much into blind metaphysics. Consider this line of thought. There is only one Harry. Even when he timetravels it is a single Harry in two places. Thus, when Harry sees an event the first time round he is both seeing it and simultaneously making a time-displaced decision to carry out acts that would lead to that result. This is hardly impossible, indeed all decisions we make are time-displaced in such a manner. We make decisions all the time without being aware of them. The fact that we are not aware of the choice does not necessarily diminish our agency (well, it all depends on where one stands on the determinism debate).

Thus, the first time through Harry effectively 'made' all the decisions that would lead to the events observed. Then, when traveling through the loop he simply acted on those decisions. His agency was not diminished; he still made the decisions. It just so happens that the decisions were made a long time before it appears he acted upon them.

Or imagine the time turner did the following:

1) Send your memory of the last x hours back in time to a created (identical) body in the past.
2) The body is NOT YOU, merely an avatar with an impression of self that acts out the events seen in your memory.
3) Simultaneously the time-turner teleports you to the current location of the fake body while imparting you with the 'memories' of the body.

So the actions of the avatar are determined. Yet they are determined by the decisions made before they used the time turner, thus the user never actually loses agency.

Yeah, it's basically semantics, but given the existance of souls and stuff like that in HP we can't honestly apply the kind of physical determinism assumed by NSCP. Really I'd generally lean towards the first two options, the existance of magic rather undermines any hard and fast physics based ideas.

 

First of all, occam's razor, think about it.

How is your version consistent with NSCP? This is what you wrote: "So, yes, I suppose as soon as he saw himself at the lakeside his choice to travel back in time was 'fixed'. But it didn't have to be, there are a lot of ways for a wizard to look like James/Harry Potter from a distance. Any of those ways could have been present and the loop would have remained consistant."

This is not at all consistent with NSCP! I explained and also explained why this version is highly impossible and what it impies, where is your counter argument to that? Nowhere, but you insist that you version is consistent.

Then why don't you provide and show with examples how your theory is applicable?

If time turners were capable of producing paradoxes, do you think they would have handed it out to 12 year old girl! Facetious! Till now, all you have done is say this possible, this too is possible, my version is also correct but without any evidence. A poor counter argument.

Ah, another strawman, they seem quite popular with the folks here. NSCP is physics, magic breaks physics, I win, hahahaha! Didn't they show Monty Python and Holy Grail's sketch regarding logic in school and show you what mistakes you should avoid? But wait, basic logic doesn't apply! Quite a convenient way to prove yourself right.

Now you are begging the question, seriously, can you write one paragraph without making a fallacy? Lots of assumptions here, I don't see how this connects to time travel either. I guess you anted to use the word "quantum" once again.

Finally, something relevant to the discussion! This is not possible because in H universe not only is the future Harry's actions are already decided and set, their repercussions on the past Harry also happen. So what you are saying is, he makes the decisions the future "avatar" will take, without even knowing what circumstances and situations he will be in, along with deciding how future Harry will affect him and then act like there is a future Harry doing things that have been decided in Harry's mind. How did the past harry know that in future Hermione will be talking to him and the things she will say, if he didn't, ho did he decide his response? How did he know what situations he will be in? This is nonsense! I don't even think we need to use Occam's razor, this plain wrong. Why? Next paragraph.

What about Hermione, when she uses her time turner to attend another class, how can she decide that her "avatar" will raise hand in order to ask this particular question, and give this answer, without knowing what the question is! How did she decide that what she will do when her "avatar" will meet Harry and Ron after the class? She didn't know that will happen! How did she decide she how her avatar will respond to all the people it will and and her responses to things that they will say! But wait! It's magic, logic doesn't apply! Bullshit.

Time travel is clearly according to NSCP. Paradoxes don't happen, if time turner could end the universe, they would have been even harder to find than V's horcruxes. They definitely wouldn't have given it to a 12 year old! The actions of your future self affect the past world, note past world and not self, simultaneously, alternate timelines do not exist. Paradoxes are impossible to create, events are predetermined.

Also, NSCP is not valid physics theory! It's just a conjecture to solve the problem of paradoxes, it is not set in hard and fast physics based idea which are debunked by magic. It assumes time travel is possible!

 

First of all, Magic. Think about it.

You appear to have decided that your idea is the simplest solution harboring the fewest assumptions. Application of the Anthropic Principle makes no assumptions and can still produce the scene we saw played out with the time turner.

It doesn't matter how improbable an event is if the Anthropic Principle applies.

I believe I did, in general terms (specific examples are specious, it is easy to find a case where a theory appears to exist while not being generally applicable). In fact you attempt to address it right afterwards...

Anthropic Principle. If the universe stops existing when a paradox happens the only universes that exist are worlds where, purely by chance, no paradoxes DID happen. Thus wizards assume it's safe to hand them out willy-nilly.

Firstly, Strawman or you are simply extremely poor at representing your own position (or are presenting it in the vaguest possible terms)? Saying 'Novikov! Read up on it!' is not an argument.

Secondly, what you descibe is not a strawman. I have not misrepresented your argument in any way. You have simply decided that my point has no merit because, apparently, you don't like it.

NSCP is not physics. It assumes physics is universally consistent. This is not a proven assumption in even our own universe, let alone the HP-verse.

Thus your argument is entirely based off an appeal to probability fallacy, yet you don't even make an attempt to explain why it is probable that the HP-verse abides by the consistent physics required for NSCP.

Yes, assumptions. We're talking about a world that exists only in books and cannot be tested. Thus we have to make assumptions based on the material. Kind of like the

Begging the question. How did he know! Show me how he COULD NOT know and I will give you this point.

Yeah. So, basically. I'm done.

I have no desire to waste my life 'arguing' with someone apparently incapable of outlining their own position accurately. Who's holier than thou attitude seems to betray the kind of intellectual snobbery due to no human. Who is seemingly blind to his own staggering hypocrisy and willfully ignorant of the true nature of informal fallacies.

I shall end with a list of the 'fallacies' in your argument thus far.

Argument from fallacy : because apparently fallacies in an argument make that argument invalid.
Affirming the consequent : If NVCP is true then no paradoxes. No paradoxes therefor NCVP.
Argumentum ad ignorantiam : Apparently your claim is true because no-one can provide counterproof. Despite your argument having no (non fallacious) proof.
Argumentum ad nauseam : 'If I keep posting the same stuff and accusing people or thoughtcrime they'll go away and I'll win.'
Appeal to ridicule : 'lolzors your argument is like Monty Python. Therefore, wrong.'
Appeal to authority : 'This guy had this (NVCP) idea. Therefore it's correct. I do not need to provide evidence for our specific case.'
Moral high ground fallacy : 'You use fallacies, therefore I'm a better person and my argument should be seen in a better light.'
Onus probandi : 'Disprove my thesis! If you cannot come up with a completely provable alternative then OBVIOUSLY I'm right!'
Repetitio principii : 'Basically the time travel follows Novikov self consistent principle, therefore predestination.' Oh, right, well that's great. Glad we got that straightened out.
Mind projection fallacy : 'NVCP is the only thing I can see, our universe is the only one I can test. Therefore NVCP applies to all universes!'

Oh, look, you've dragged me down to your level and I'm now spouting philosophy crap I stopped caring about 10 years ago. And, for the scorecard, I just pulled off one hell of a tu quoque.

I was never trying to prove NVCP wrong. I merely pointed out that it was not the only possibility, and that a narrative universe does not always abide by the simplest solution. Occams Razor has no application in analysing a narrative universe; narrative causality supercedes it.

You, sir, are a buffoon and a bounder. I wash my hands of you.

(Ad hominem++)

 

Wow, the Titanic scenario they quote on that page is remarkably similar to the scenarios I've used here on a few occasions to explain how a Time Turner can be used to change the past in ways that save someone's life or prevent something bad from happening to them.

I suddenly feel (unjustifiably) smarter.

 

I'm not begging the question, (is that actually even a fallacy when time travel is involved?) my point is exactly that: Harry will not survive without the help of future Harry and because he doesn't survive, there will be no future Harry to save him --> Totally consistent.

My problem with this scenario is how the time-loop was created at all. Harry should have been kissed, end of story. Somehow the universe (or magic) or whatever decided to insert a time-loop in order to save Harry.

Now that I think about it, probably Dumbledore: he was the only one who knew Hermione had a time-turner and who wouldn't have been dead without the time-turner. So because DD knew that there was always the option of using a time-turner to fix things if they went wrong, it allowed for the creation of the time-loop (he also seemed the only one in the past to know there was time-travel involved).

As to predeterminism: at no point does past!Harry know future!Harry is even there, so future!Harry's action are in no way limited because of past!Harry's recollection of events. He could have gotten his broomstick from his dorm, fly down to the lake and wait the next three hours waiting for his 'father' to appear and nothing would have changed at all.

 

Time travel doesn't exist in real life. Stop pretending it has concrete rules and pull your head out of your ass. Time travel is a fictional trope the nature of which varies just as much as the fantasy and science fiction settings that depict it.

Let me ask you, what do we know about time travel in Harry Potter? Very little. Next to nothing, really. Only that it's use can potentially be dangerous, and that there does not seem to be a 'pure' timeline or sequence of events where time travel was not used (i.e. a disaster happens, then someone goes back in time to fix it and succeeds or otherwise changes events). Rather, the events are already changed to take into account the time travel, because the time travel is happening 'now' and not 'later,' because terms like 'now' and 'later' are no longer strictly correct or relevant where the individuals time traveling are concerned.

You are using a void of information (the nature of travel in Harry Potter) to transplant other ideas from other fictional or theoretical places to attempt to support a faulty supposition.

I cast out time travel as subject that can be used to prove or disprove the existence of predestination in Harry Potter, because we lack sufficient knowledge about it. It's not evidence for or against anything. You can't use it to prove that predestination exists any more than I can use it to prove that it doesn't.

If you want to argue whether or not predestination exists in Harry Potter, there is a much easier way to do it. Prophecy.

Prophecy is someone using magic (presumably) to look into the future, either deliberately or spontaneously, and detail the events they see.

If predestination existed in the Harry Potter universe, then all prophecies should contain at least some amount of truth or accuracy in them, even if we assume that fallacy and human error can come into play and distort them.

But that is not the case. Dumbledore flat-out tells us that prophecies hold little meaning. Now, we can ignore that, on the grounds that it's his opinion and he can be fallible, even though he's obviously being used for exposition by the author. But what we can't ignore is that Dumbledore then goes on to say that there are plenty of prophecies recorded in the Hall of Prophecy that simply never came to pass.

In a world with predestination and functional fortune telling, this should not be possible. All prophecies should come to pass, at least in part, because there can be no deviation from the sequence of events that were, are, and will be. The destination is set already from the outset, hence the phrase predestination.

And yet they don't. Because, as Dumbledore stated, people can choose to try and fulfill them, and in doing so fail, or attempt to avoid them, and in doing so accidentally fulfill them.

Prophecies are not an accurate prediction of the future, so much as they are a glimpse at a single possibility, a look at something that could happen, but might not.

In a world with predestination, there would be no such thing as an invalidated prophecy. And yet there is.

 

Actually, the Theory of General Relativity does allow for time travel in certain very unusual circumstances, so brushing it off as impossible is a flawed argument. However, it has been hypothesised that a theory of quantum gravity (which would join GR and quantum mechanics into a greater theory) would close the loop holes that allow for time travel. We don't have a theory of quantum gravity yet though, so it's still fairly up in arms about whether this is possible or not.

Still, I agree that there is no predestination in the HPverse, at least when it comes to prophecy. Whether that applies to time travel by itself or not is a different matter, however.

---------- Post automerged 21-02-2014 at 12:12 AM ---------- Previous post was 20-02-2014 at 11:45 PM ----------

Well, no. Time travel exists in the HPverse, therefore the probability of time travel being used to save a person's life is non-zero. It's possible, therefore it cannot be discounted as a scenario that could save Harry's life in that instance.

Well, that would assume that Dumbledore knew there was going to be a problem requiring the use of a time turner to solve, which is possible but not probable given that he thought Sirius was a deranged murderer when Hermione received it.

You're not looking at it right. There isn't a point at which past!Harry becomes future!Harry. It's all just Harry on one long timeline. Hell, it's more accurate to say that we are reading a story that is not set in the present.

So in other words, the events that past!Harry lives through (such as the corporeal Patronus) are fixed because they have already happened from future!Harry's point of view. It's not so much a matter of predestination then, as it is a matter of being unable to change the past, which is consistent with the NSCP.

 

I will brush it off as impossible, because there is no such thing as a time machine, and until there is, or such proof can be shown of the existence of a naturally occurring effect that renders the same result, it will remain impossible.

I don't particularly care if the math says it's possible. The math also says gravity shouldn't exist. Nobody has ever observed a graviton, ever, even though they should be literally omnipresent. Gravity is an effect that has no cause that we can discern. Our math is clearly flawed, as is our ability to observe and chart the workings of the universe.

And that's ignoring the fact that this is a fictional universe to begin with. Why should anybody give half a shit about real physics? It's a magic hourglass necklace. It doesn't have to be consistent with real world anything, and anybody who uses real world anything to argue about that has their head rammed entirely too far up the asshole of hard science fiction. As long as it's consistent with itself, there is no problem. And it is.

 

I'm not touching this with a shitty stick. I'm just going to laugh at your ignorance and move on.

We're not really arguing physics here, which you'd have noticed if you were not, yourself, suffering from a rather severe case of cranial rectal inversion. We're discussing philosophy and whether an aspect of a story relates to one philosophical principle or not.

Really though, you'd think with how long you've been on this site you'd know that we're all anal retentive assholes.