Yea the guy with the soul of Voldemort in him and the most brilliant person ever are great examples of the average wizard. Totes.


By the way Hermione did certainly not apperate by accident, such a feat would be impossible. What she did was acting on instinct. In order to apperate she had to concentrate both on the location and on the people she was bringing with her. Since she had to do not only that, but do it while being in a stressful situation those things combined resulted in her having spliced Ron. It does not seem to me as such a great method of transportation when the most brilliant person ever, when push comes to shove, is not even able to use it without crippling her companions.

Harry on the other hand has done so well in his apperation course because he has done it before while running away from big D, *COUGH* and because he had a Voldemorts soul *COUGH*.

But those two are hardly representative examples, they were the best of their year, in the best magical school in the entire world.

Responding to such arguments that you have provided, started to give me the idea that I am writing to someone suffering with mental retardation and if that is the case please in the future, spend more time trying to understand what I wrote before you make a reply.

 

Just out of curiousity, what benefit does Harry get from the bit of Voldemort's soul other than being able to speak Parseltongue? In canon, I mean.

 

None. Except the cheating death part. There was that.

Voldemort's Horcrux gave him no extra magical ability save for the ability to speak Parseltongue.

You can fuck right off with comments like that. If you want to be an arsehole, be funny, like you almost managed in your first post. As it is I'm getting papercuts from the edge you're packing into your posts.

Edit: Also goddam man, tidy up your posts.

 

You might not want to throw rocks while you live in a glass house - though I know idiots never actually realize they are.

Harry is not better at magic because he has a piece of Voldemort in him - he's just above average, and struggled with many aspects of magic - and Hermione isn't "the most brilliant person ever". Also, Hogwarts isn't the best school of magic in the world.

Hermione side-apprated Yaxley by accident - as in, she tried to apparate, he caught hold of her, and she apparated him without intention. I repeat, because you seem to have a hard time grasping the argument. The apparition wasn't an accident, the side-along-Yaxley was.

Now, there were a number of spells and magical feats in canon that had other wizards impressed - side-slong apparition wasn't one of them. At no point did anyone say "wow Harry, you side-along apparated with two people!". It's probably a bit harder or more dangerous, but not something that the average adult wizard can't do. The same goes to concealment spells which Rowling treats as commonly used by many wizards who live among muggles.

While Harry is by no means an average kid, it doesn't mean that everything he does is above the norm. Harry also brushes his teeth and cooks bacon, and I'm pretty sure that most people can do that.

Magic is powerful. Stop trying to make wizards weak by claiming that they can't perform ordinary spells.

 

And even that wasn't solely down to the soul fragment.

 

But, like has already been mentioned, his entire dorm room, including a centuries-pedigreed pureblood, was in awe of the fact that he'd been Side-Alonged at the age of sixteen. Which doesn't point to wizards doing all that much Apparition, or being good enough to consistently Side-Along, because why else is it worthy of note that someone nearly old enough to legally learn himself has been taken along on an Apparition trip?

Or, you know, they could employ people to put them on. Just like they [indirectly] employ people to transport them by Floo.

"Computers are powerful. Stop trying to make humans weak by claiming they can't do ordinary things like tell you what a kernel is or schedule a chron job."

It's abundantly clear that wizardkind cannot in fact satisfactorily perform all of the spells on the Hogwarts curriculum, because if they could the wizarding world would not have an economy or [relative] poverty such as the Weasleys live in. Unless you want to go the opposite route and claim they're collectively too stupid to use what they've been taught, and in that case more grease to your elbow, I guess.

 

A somewhat valid point, but as has been stated in canon apparation isn't a particularly comfortable means of traveling, not to mention dangerous as well. Its no wonder people avoid using it when there are better alternatives like floo and portkey. At the same time it is a skill every qualified wizard is expected to know.

Or maybe they do it themselves. But its all speculation. Either way you can't say for sure.

Speculation again.

Since when have the Weasleys been the standard for middle-class in the wizarding world? They're poor because they've had to put seven kids through school and Mr. Weasley worked a dead-end job. It doesn't seem to have anything to do with their economy.

 

Huh. A few posts ago wizards were apparently Apparating everywhere willy-nilly.

"(Self-)Driving isn't a particularly comfortable means of traveling, not to mention dangerous as well. It's no wonder that people avoid using it when there are better alternatives like buses and trains. At the same time it is a skill most modern adults are expected to know."

I wouldn't trust someone who hasn't touched a wheel in ten years to drive me halfway across the state in a pinch. Likewise I'm skeptical of the average wizard's ability to quickly Apparate out of danger, considering that many have had no actual need to apparate since they got their license and the youthful enthusiasm wore off.

> Or maybe they do it themselves. But its all speculation. Either way you can't say for sure.

We know that an apparently thriving economy exists based essentially on wizards doing magic for other wizards. If the average wizard was as self-sufficient as you envision, like half of Diagon Alley would not exist, to talk of the other magical businesses that are likely spread across the country.

I wish people would actually read my comments before replying to them. Like where I state that the Weasleys are a poor family, and don't even mention the middle class at all.

Putting seven kids through school is not an excuse for living in apparent poverty, seeing as Hogwarts has no tuition. Working a dead end job would have no effect if the average wizard was actually competent in the Hogwarts curriculum. The fact that they and wizarding Britain at large have to rely on an economy at all is indicative that magic is not as ubiquitous as you seem to believe it is. That, or wizardkind is hindered from using it, which is functionally the same thing.

For instance, Transfiguration is one skill many wizards apparently lack, or Madam Malkin's would not exist.

 

I don't really think it's important to this discussion what the "average" wizard can do, anyway. On a very basic level, Voldemort alone (or Flamel, or really any immortal wizard) is capable of single-handedly killing all the muggles, with all the other witches and wizards standing by the sidelines. I know this seems like an insane statement, but really the only question is how long it takes him.

An upper bound can quickly be derived from the fact that it is impossible to kill Voldemort without magic. This is true both because he can place muggle-repelling charms around his horcruxes, and also because it is (as far as we know) impossible to destroy his horcruxes without using magic. As such, his physical body might be destroyed, but he will always live on, while the muggles will eventually succumb to the heat death of the universe if given long enough without wizarding aid. No matter what happens, this fight ends with Voldemort alive and all the muggles dead. Thus, the upper bound of Voldemort vs all the muggles: 10 googol years.

So Voldemort wins even if he does absolutely nothing, but that's not exactly the fight we were all imagining, so we'll try to shorten things to a timescale we can work with. Obviously, each of these has the possibility to fail (for whatever reasons you might suggest), but - as we established - Voldemort failing to accomplish any of them just defaults to the heat death scenario in which he still outlives everybody. So, a list of possible means to (a faster) victory:
- Imperius every important world leader with access to nukes, have everybody nuke each other.
- Unleash Dementors on the world, promising to let them feed on as many muggles as they like. Muggles can neither see nor stop Dementors, and Dementors breed, so within a few years civilization has collapsed - if not through the soul-sucking, then through the paranoia.
- Infect muggles with magical diseases that they have no means of countering. They might not catch all of them, but there's probably some disease out there which checks all of the following boxes: deadly, contagious, affects muggles, impossible to counter with muggle medicine.
- Conjure enough CFCs in enough regions to irreparably damage the ozone layer and effect runaway global warming, while maintaining a small region of magically regulated temperature a mile underground.

And so on, so forth. Sure, you can spend time poking holes in each of these ideas, but the basic fact of the matter is that the only limit to the number of ways Voldemort can kill the muggles is his own creativity (and he can do multiple at once), while the muggles literally have no way of killing Voldemort. He wins by default, and also potentially in a million other ways.

And all that possibility just represents one option for the Wizarding community. Sure, we can have little quibbles about how many muggles your average shopkeeper or Ministry paper-pusher can take in a fight, but the simple fact of the matter is that the Wizarding community are collectively impervious to muggles (by virtue of rendering their cities unplottable, adding muggle-repelling charms, etc), and can attack in ways that muggles are collectively incapable of defending against.

It's like asking whether a bunch of 2D people defeat a 3D person in a fight. Sure, the 2D people are theoretically capable of harming the 3D person in the right circumstances, but if the 3D person dodges along the 3rd dimension they can't be hit, and if they attack through the third dimension they can't be blocked. Magic is the third dimension to our muggle Flatland.

 

His dorm-mates were interested in the fact that he experienced apparition, not awed by its performance. I do view that as somewhat of a plothole, but it doesn't mean that it's hard to be done - just that it isn't usually done. There are various things that aren't hard to do but are rarely done.

I specifically said that Rowling claimed that concealment charms are commonly performed by the wizards themselves. Take this excerpt from FBAWTFT for instance:

And there follows another relevant excerpt:

So owners of magical pets can not only properly and easily conceal, they are also able (and permitted) to perform memory-charms.

It's funny that you raise the Weasleys as an example for incompetent wizards, because it is made obvious that they are pretty good with a wand. Their economical situation has nothing to do with their magical skills.

Your argument about computers is a false dichotomy. "telling what a kernel is or schedule a chron job" is not something commonly taught in schools. Charms and DADA are core subjects at Hogwarts, where most magical children attend. I specifically said used the word "ordinary" before, because the spells that can be used to evade muggles are completely ordinary and taught at school, unlike advanced computer science. Even Crabbe and Goyle, who were at the bottom of their class in everything but the Dark Arts, could perform the Disillusionment charm. And it's particularly different because wizards learn those spells as life tools, whereas most muggles in the first world don't go to trade schools anymore - wizards actually apply school lessons to their daily life.

 

Voldemort would kill himself out of boredom way before that. Besides, we have no reason to believe that Horcruxes give true immortality, as one would expect there to at least a few immortal wizards around if that were the case.

 

True. I'm just severely allergic to wank of any kind.

You do realize the Earth would be destroyed long before that, right?

See, this is my problem with discussions like this - no-one ever thinks of the repercussions. You're treating the question as though the whole purpose is to win and not the implied, more important and prosper. Sure, let's turn the Earth into a nuclear wasteland, because as we all know wizards are completely immune to the effects of radioactivity/electromagnetic radiation. That is not a decision that could backfire in any way, nosirree. Sure, let's release Dementors into the world and let them build a vicious feedback loop of Dementors propagating a miasma of despair propagating more Dementors. As we all know, they would never ever attack a wizard and even if they did every wizard ever is equipped to defend themselves against ever-increasing numbers of Dementors. Sure, let's ignore the fact that Muggles likely cannot catch most magical diseases on account of being, well, not magical. Introducing such a deadly, contagious disease into a fresh population would certainly never result in mutations that could render magical knowledge on the topic obsolete. This could never, ever turn out to be an incredibly bad decision for everyone involved. Sure, let's completely strip the Earth of its ozone layer and somehow convince the entire wizarding population to move fucking underground (that's going to work out so well, and is something the Muggles obviously cannot implement themselves because whoever heard of Muggles building underground accommodation? Preposterous). It's going to wipe out most extant species on Earth? Psssh, who cares about such pesky little things as "ecosystems" and "where our food comes from, you maniac, stop this madness now" anyway?

He might win for the most nominal definition of winning (given his immortality), but even Voldemort doesn't want to be lord over a whole lot of nothing.

 

I was agreeing with you there you know. But my point stands about it not being a skill one needs to make a big deal about.

I'm not getting into an argument about this as canon neither refutes nor supports this and I'd rather not run around in circles.

And I wish people would actually read the books before making comments. But it seems neither of us are getting what we want.

Just because one doesn't pay tuition doesn't mean putting kids through school doesn't have expenses. Books, ingredients for potions, cauldrons, school robes etc still need to be paid for. Do the math will you?

 

Sure, anything that doesn't conform to your understanding of the text is a plot hole. And I never claimed that they were awed by the performance (which was Dumbledore's, after all, not Harry's); they were awed by the fact that he had been along. Indicating that none of them had ever in fact been Side-Alonged, despite at least one of them having a well-to-do, purely Wizarding upbringing.

Some people would read that and conclude that owners of large magical pets such as hippogriffs are few and far between due to the stringent requirements, and said legislation is supposed to restrict just anyone from buying such a pet. Especially since we've seen at least six years of magical education that did not in fact teach our protagonist how to perform a memory charm or to Disillusion things (he appears to have learnt at least the latter from observing Hermione, though I'm doubtful pre-epilogue Harry could Obliviate a child), and the existence of Ministry-employed Obliviators.

Or you could take it as evidence that all wizards can cast those spells, sure.

You're the one claiming they're incompetent, because being really good with wands means they have no excuse for their economical situation if magic is as casually usable as this thread is arguing. On the other hand I think that magic is not so casually usable, which opens up room for people who are pretty good with wands to not live in apparent if not real wealth.

"Advanced computer science", lmfao. I learnt both of those in secondary school, though to be fair a) CS was compulsory and b) it was an above-average school economically speaking.

Not to mention that there's zero proof that Crabbe and Goyle performed Disillusionment charms on themselves.

 

And if I were competent in the Hogwarts curriculum I wouldn't need to pay for more than one child beyond potions, because that's something that doesn't mix well with magic. I still do not understand why people even buy robes, when Geminio and/or some fairly basic transfiguration should turn rags into haute couture.

 

Actually we are told that the Horcruxes do just that: make one incapable of dying.

 

Yes, I absolutely am, but that's because those examples were for the hypothetical scenario of Voldemort vs the muggles, where the only objective is to kill every member of the other side. I made that hypothetical as a simplification, so I could directly compare the efficacy of magical methods to muggle methods. The specific methods described aren't applicable to the larger discussion, but they don't have to be, because the conclusion is. What I was trying to point out was that magic can make you invulnerable to muggle means of attack and render you capable of ignoring any muggle defenses. When scaling up to the size of a society and including additional constraints, this still remains just as true. Thus, although the precise actions taken will obviously differ, the point remains that the average wizard's strength is irrelevant: as a community, they are capable of striking with impunity at places the muggle community cannot defend against.

 

What's the point of hypotheticals like that? You admit it's not going to happen, it's an exercise in silly extremes. Even if Voldemort lost his remaining marbles all at once and decided salting the Earth was the Dark Lord job du jour, the rest of wizardkind isn't going to sit around while he ruins their planet.

Maybe it's just me but "wizards would win this because of this hypothetical scenario that would never actually happen involving means they wouldn't actually use" isn't productive discussion. Like nukes, magic is a potent enough force that you shouldn't have to resort to wank to support your point.

 

I think that the problem is that some people are so focused on the "magic is might" slogan that they cast aside their and others knowledge of the books and book canon in order to come up with ridiculous scenarios that they think would absolutely destroy muggle societies but somehow not bother the wizarding ones.

Those scenarios I'd like to add, are ridiculous because of several things that constantly occur in them:
a) they require unity amongst the wizarding population of magical britain,
b) they require unity amongst the wizarding population of the entire magical community,
c) they require organisation competence that is almost impossible with human beings,
d) they assume no will, way, resources, ability et cetera, et cetera on the side of the muggles,
e) they treat muggle ways of combat/warfare as ineffective all of the time in every way because authors of those scenarios put some obstacle that they think is impossible to overcome, or that because they couldn't overcome it therefore no one ever has or will be able to in the future,
f) they put too much credit in apperation discarding the requirements of it; that you can only apperate to places that you have been before and don't have apperation jinxes and you can picture well in your head or have a good memory of them.

Cheers.

 

"Imagine a frictionless sphere in a vacuum," a Physics professor starts saying to his students. Immediately, one of them stands up and objects, claiming: "Nothing is frictionless, we've never constructed a perfect sphere, and it is currently impossible to create a true vacuum." And he is correct - we will, in all likelihood, never find a true frictionless sphere in a vacuum, but we still use these models in Physics so that we can study specific phenomena in isolation.

For example: a pendulum is always affected by air resistance and friction, and both of those things can make calculations difficult at first, both conceptually and mathematically. However, it's still an easy matter to prove that a pendulum released by your nose will not, on its return journey, smack you in the face. We can do this by visualizing a much simpler frictionless pendulum in a vacuum and showing that, with the much simpler laws that apply there, it won't hit you. From there, with the knowledge that air resistance and friction can only act as damping forces in this oscillatory system, it's very simple to show that you can safely release a pendulum by your nose.

In this case, a (more) ruthless Voldemort without any other wizards around is our frictionless sphere, our pendulum in the vacuum. Impossible, yes, even for this fictional universe, but he demonstrates what happens when you pit magical means directly against muggle means, with no limits to either side on what gets used. From there, we impose limits and correct for the adjustments. For example:
- Morals introduced. Horcruxes no longer acceptable, limitations on means of magical attack.
is counterbalanced by
- Individual becomes society. Horcruxes no longer necessary to play the long game, concealment and other defensive methods still apply, more people with which to carry out the limited attacks.
And so on, so forth.