Compliments to Wikipedia

Psychopathy, or sociopathy- is currently defined in psychiatry and clinical psychology as a condition characterized by lack of empathy or conscience, and poor impulse control or manipulative behaviors.

A psychopath has no concern for the feelings of others and a complete disregard for any sense of social obligation, though superficially they seem like a normal person. They can be charming and polite on the surface, but this only disguises their lack of empathy. They seem egocentric and lack insight of any sense of responsibility or consequence. Their emotions are thought to be superficial and shallow, if they exist at all. They are considered callous, manipulative, and incapable of forming lasting relationships, let alone showing any kind of meaningful love. They typically never perform any action unless they determine it can be beneficial for themselves.

The following childhood indicators are to be interpreted not as to the type of behavior, but as to its relentless and unvarying occurrence. Not all must be present concurrently, but at least a number of them need to be present over a period of years:

1) An extended period of bedwetting past the preschool years that is not due to any medical problem.

2) Cruelty to animals beyond an angry outburst.

3) Firesetting and other vandalism. Not to be confused with playing with matches, which is not uncommon for preschoolers. This is the deliberate setting of destructive fires with utter disregard for the property and lives of others.

3)Lying, often without discernible objectives, extending beyond a child's normal impulse not to be punished. Lies are so extensive that it is often impossible to know lies from truth.

4)Theft and truancy.

5) Aggression to peers, not necessarily physical, which can include getting others into trouble or a campaign of psychological torment.

I bolded all the ones that mostly refer to Riddle. JKR mentioned that by the age of 5, Riddle was already showing signs like this. He is aggresive to the other orphans and rules over them and torments them. He steals their belongings. He was known to be charming and manipulative, etc etc.

As the signs of a Sociopath can be seen in a child, even to parents who treat them good, it is something they are born with. Just like Riddle, it wasn't about environment.

As for the muggle thing. Riddle sees Muggles as inferior beings, just look at how he treats muggleborns. Being heir to Slytherin, his father abandon him, being in Slytherin, he has many reasons to hate muggles.

 

My vote goes to Dumbledore.
Specifically canon Dumbledore, he's just too smart for Voldemort. FF is another story.

 

Let's think about this for a second, if Dumbles didn't get setback by the death of his mom and sister, who knows if there would have even been a Lord Voldemort.
He could have taken over and Tom Riddle may have never even come into existence or if he did, he would have gotten back handed so hard by overlord Dumbledore. Dumbles gets the vote. Even if he didn't take over the world he still managed to stay powerful and crafty even in his old age. I mean when your double the age of the person your dueling and you can still match them you know you get props for that.

 

I vote for Dumbledore here... He himself admitted ,in HBP I guess, that his age was catching up or sth like that and that his reflexes weren't as good as before. All in all, he was sth over 150 years while dueling to a draw with Riddle in Atrium. Besides, you have to admit, that he was able to manipulate everyone, deceive them, hide his true goals AND not be caught while doing so. At least as long as he was alive.

Voldemort had a lot of magical power (enchanced by rituals), as well as the power that the fear gave him. Dumbledore on the other hand acheived much more in various fields. He had a lot of power, both magical and political, not to mention his academic acheivements.

As to Dumbledore the Overlord... if he were to become one, I guess that people would do his bidding out of respect, lack of knowledge of the facts, or because they would be manipulated into doing so, however they would be doing it out of their own will.

 

You forgot to add Grindelwald to the polls.

 

...no I didn't. I deliberatly didn't add him, as the main topic is Dumbledore vs. Voldemort. Grindlewald was just an aside.

 

Voldemort won in the end. I don't give Dumbledore much credit for planning Harry's defeat of Voldemort, cause his plan had so many gaping holes in it, it was sheer dumb luck it didn't go spectacularly wrong.

Dumbledore was smarter than Voldemort, but he was crippled by his inability to work around his greatest weakness: the lure of power. He had the potential to nip Voldemort's rise in the bud, but he failed. He also failed in his own contribution to the Horcrux destruction, because he couldn't resist putting on a ring that he knew for sure was a Horcrux. I don't find this excusable as a momentary weakness, because he was very old and wise at the time, it was a couple of generations after the events in his youth and he had had ample opportunity to think thoroughly through what he should do if he ever found that ring.

Voldemort lived up to his potential. Dumbledore never did, and Aberforth got it right: a lot of people suffered because he meddled with their lives despite his unwillingness to take on full responsibility (becoming Minister e.g.).

 

Voldemort lived up to his potential?

Lol, he got beaten by a 17 year old kid. Not much potential then...

This could also be disputed, since Dumbledore lived far longer than Voldemort.

 

Imo, he beat himself. He was obsessed with Harry because of the Prophecy but never bothered to find out what really made him dangerous to him. If he had come to the same conclusion as Dumbledore, that Divination sucks (this is an intellectual conclusion and not out of Voldemort's reach), Dumbledore's master plan wouldn't have worked.

Dumbledore was putting his trust in Voldemort's stupidity, gave Harry a few pointers and hoped for the best.

 

Voldemort is definitely stronger magically. He is able to duel Dumbledore to a standstill when Dumbles had the 'invincible' Elder Wand. And, to go with that, without Fawkes' sacrifice Voldemort's AK would have killed Dumbledore. If this is a question of power, at least, I think Voldemort is the winner. If it is a question of skill and technique that it is probably Dumbledore that wins. Using transfiguration to fight must take much more skill that throwing out loads of uber!strong dark curses.

 

I voted for Voldemort, if for no other reason than that he is cooler.
Seriously, he could do pretty much all of the stuff Dumbledore could + he managed to make six Horcruxes, which no one before him had done, and live to tell the tale.

 

DH really dropped my opinion of Voldemort. For a clever guy, he certainly makes a hell of a lot of stupid decisions.

Before, I would have put Dumbledore just a shade higher than Voldemort. Now, there's no contest.

 

I concur. Throughout the series we all loved Voldemort, he is probably one of the better antagonist around. But JKR goes and destroys everything we though of him in DH. Instead he turns out to be a loser who makes more mistakes than a retarded person writing a college thesis.

He loses to the average Harry fucking Potter, and what really is irksome is that Harry isn't all that powerful or great. He isn't going to be remembered as a immensely powerful wizard or a genius like Dumbledore. Instead he won on a technicality.

Fanon Voldemort is so much better. JKR really should take some lessons from some fanfiction writers on characterizing.

 

Well, not all fanon Voldemort. Your typical Voldemort in fanfiction does little more than sitting on a throne and using the Cruciatus on Wormtail.

What I did like about the DH Voldemort is that he actually did stuff himself, and that he was always on the move.

 

Dumbledore lived to over 150.
Voldemort only made it to about 65.

Dumbledore was slain after a rigged dull while poisoned and hillucinating.
Voldemort was slain by some punk ass kid with a passion for self ritious monologes.

Dumbledore rules the country from his comfy chair in the headmaster's office.
Voldemort can't manage more then a few angry fallowers until Dumbledore is out of the way.

Dumbledore is a cold hearted bastard, but manages to convince everyone that he is a kindly grandfather.
Voldemort is a cold hearted bastard, and is forced to rule through fear.

Dumbledore wins.

 

Well, yes, he did behave like a hysterical little bitch. Of course, you can always chalk that up to the fact that his soul was torn to shreds, so he had trouble controlling his emotions as a possible side effect.

 

Definatly Dumbledore in my opinion.
First of all, he knew much much more magic than Voldemort who mainly relied on Avada Kedevra and the Cruciatus Curse. Also he knew how to bring down the rumored most powerful wizard ever to go through Hogwarts, and he LEARNS from his mistakes and Voldemort did not, he let his ego and pride rule his decisions. Dumbledore BEAT Gellert Grindlewald while Grindlewald had the Elder Wand, supposed to be make the user invincible. That means Dumbledore is powerful enough to beat a supposed invincible enemy, where Voldemort's fight with Dumbledore ended in a draw. Dumbledore probably knew more dark magic than Tom Riddle, but he had the judgement to know he would probably become that overlord that everyone is talking about. Voldemort had so many chances to learn from his mistakes, but he instead blamed all those around him for it.
Dumbledore
Voldemort
Grindlewald

 

After reading the 7th book, I have to go with Dumbledore. I'm not much of a might makes right person. Voldemort was a great wizard no doubt, but he let his vanity cloud his objectives at times. Albus was a lot more subtle, which I find to be a better characteristic in a person.

 

How did he win? Dumbledore's death couldn't even be attributed as Voldemort's achievement. Dumbledore arranged for his own death. Besides, why does Deathly Hallows have a chapter entitled Nineteen Years Later?

For the number of holes Dumbledore's plan had, Voldemort sure played right into it. Who's the bigger fool? The fool who makes the trap, or the fool who falls into it?

He was actually (in a way) able to work around his weakness for power by staying away from positions of power that he was sure would tempt him. Otherwise, Dark Overlord Dumbledore would have existed instead of Grandfather-figure Dumbledore with the knack for Deceptions.

How did he fail? I seem to recall Harry went on a hunting trip because Dumbledore gave him the information regarding the horcruxes.

Pleading momentary weakness could still even be applicable to Dumbledore. You can't expect everyone to be ready for temptation yet to remain unfazed in the face of it. More so in Dumbledore's case who viewed the ring as a symbol of a past that haunts him.

Voldemort was actually doing a nice job of living up to his potential until a certain prophecy side-tracked him and led to his first fall. Then he gets himself killed with an expelliarmus used by an average teenager. What a way to live up to his potential.

Did Dumbledore not live up to his potential? Is it me or was it mentioned that Dumbledore was the Merlin of his age? Aberforth was even wrong when he said that Dumbledore was unwilling to take full responsibility. If Dumbledore was unwilling to take full responsibility then Ariana's death wouldn't have haunted him.

Clearly, Dumbledore owns Voldemort. If not for the prophecy, Dumbledore might have already been done with him...

 

Since I read the DH I actually thought that the only reason Dumbledore could not wipe the floor with Voldemort's ass was because of the prophecy concerning the Dark Lord and Harry.

DH has portrayed Dumbledore to be a genius wizard, making some discoveries and breakthroughs in magic even while he was a student. He's often been qualified as the greatest wizard of all time in Rowling's books and as a mastermind he's demonstrated to be way better than Voldemort.

Tom Riddle had been an excellent promising student, but the books don't suggest him to anything way out of the ordinary until he dwelled in the Dark Arts. Yes, he was intelligent, had charisma and a lot of power, but JKR never suggested him to be above Dumbledore.

In the DoM, Dumbledore put up a good duel and fought him equally, even being twice Voldemort's age... That should suffice to see who's the better wizard...