One thing that has always boggled me about the Harry Potter series -and it's author in particular, is how there is not a single part of the books truly dedicated to teaching the reader the fundamentals of Magic, and it's taking place at a fucking school for witches and wizards!

In Transfiguration, Charms, and Defense Against the Dark Arts the students are taught spells and how to cast them, but that doesn't tell people how to think like a wizard should, what stereotypical perfect qualities there are that a wizard should have, or about how magical itself functions. All of these I'd classify as different fundamentals that need to be learned in a cultural based around one's magical ability.

The class that should broach the topic, History of Magic, is filled with goblin rebellions and boring facts about Dark Age wizards and witches. It's history, alright, but just as boring of a class as any regular Muggle student's would be.

TL;DR: So, what I'm asking is for a list of what people believe are the Fundamentals of Magic based on the tid-bits we got in canon, seeing as JKR let too much of her intellectual capacity -or lack their off, shine through.

 

In before Taure's TL;DR

 

Flashes Taure Signal

 

I always figured it was left unexplained because 95% of wizards just plain don't care. With a few exceptions, wizards seem to be extremely lazy and woefully ignorant of the world around them. They don't have the same drive to learn, explore and discover that the muggles do. There's three rules of magic the average wizard needs to learn and all three of them are covered in the first week of classes.

1. If you wave your wand and say some words, shit happens.
2. If you use different words, different shit happens.
3. If you use the right words, the shit you make happen is the same as the shit you want to happen.

The other seven years are spent learning basic vocabulary and thwarting Dark Lords.

 

This

At the end of the day I don't think JKR could be bothered with coming up with some sort of magical theory applicable to her universe. One because she doesn't want to go over her readers head with a bunch of made up theory. Two, if she did it would go against the trend of nothing making sense. She is perfectly comfortable with the simple explanation "it's magic"

 

Pay attention, Snarf.

Once more, with feeling.

End this thread, please.

 

You know, when JKR started writing HP she didn't write it with children in mind... she didn't write it for anyone, as she didn't think it would get published. It was Bloomsbury that chose to sell it as a children's book (which, really, is the level of literature it is at). But JKR doesn't get to hide behind "it's a kids book excuses". She herself has said in interview that she never wrote it for kids or with kids in mind - she wrote it for herself.

As for the OP: there are many threads already discussing this. If you want my opinions, click on my sig.

Though you do raise an interesting point about wizarding mindsets. Philosopher's Stone is one of the few times we see this: when Hermione mentions that most wizards lack any ability to reason logically.

You have to think to this: why? Why do they lack the ability to make logical judgements, when logic is so essential to make day to day decisions? The answer can only be that, due to the existence and widespread use of magic, illogical things happen all the time (which is to say: contradictions can exist - something can be two different things at once), and thus logic - or logic as we know it - is useless to a wizard in normal circumstances. Rather, a wizard would have a completely different way of looking at the world.

 

This, although logic does have its place in magic. I wouldn't say wizards are lacking logic, just that they have a different kind of logic.

Potions is an inherently scientific subject, requiring precise, logical judgments based on reactions between specific magical substances, not unlike Chemistry. A person like Snape, who could alter and improve potions at a young age, undoubtedly has a highly logical mind.

That's just a quick example. There are plenty of potential examples of wizarding logic or the use of the scientific methodologies in magic that one could come up with.

It seems to me that magic has its own logic, which can, at times, be at odds with muggle logic. I don't think we can say either group has the advantage when it comes to logic though.

And can we really trust first year Hermione with such a huge judgment regarding the mindset of all wizards? Remember, in PS she is a naive, bossy know-it-all; fresh off the train and not used to wizarding ways. I don't think it is prudent to take Hermione's word as truth, especially at that point in time.

 

The way I've always understood HP magic is that it's less what it is, and more what you think it is. Mind over matter in a way that most people don't think about it.

The Shield charm isn't a Shield charm because it's the result of saying an incantation and waving a wand- it's a Shield charm because you're told it's a Shield charm, and that's what you expect it to be. The wand waving and incantation are just simply ways for us to understand what we want the magic to do.

 

By asking what the Fundamentals are specifically, aren't you screwing up a bit of the fanfic? I honestly think the only reason that HP has much more fan fiction writers compared to Tamora Pierce is because the writers have much more leeway in terms of imagination which ends up with everyone thinking they know what the ' real point' is.
I do think that for the many halfway decent references JK makes in HP she probably has some type of logic behind it, but I don't think we can find it or that it would be a better story if we know it. For all we know the explanations JK makes for herself and the Wizarding World are screwed up enough to make our eyes pop out.

 

But, for the sake of stoned-thread-recycling, that seems like an interesting plot idea, Taure.

As it's not canon.

Wizards think exactly as Muggles do, except they have solutions to things Muggles do not yet have, or better solutions to things they do have. I don't know a single instance in Canon besides Hermione's comment that allow me to come to the conclusion that the people of the Wizarding World don't utilize logic.

Every minute of their existence shows that they have the ability to make logical judgments, from their government structure to how they structure their household. Everything is logically sound.

That said, it should be as Hermione said it. In a society of being that can warp reality as they see fit with very few limitations, one shouldn't need to base their thoughts on the boundaries of reality. Anything is possible when you have magic, so your mentality should mimic that.

But it doesn't.

 

That's because it was written by a bloody muggle.

 

That's because Binns is a shit teacher.

 

Rofl, that's why Hermione had an O on her OWL's. What he taught was the curriculum, established by the state, which is just like our own education system. The fact is that there are no differences between how Magical people run their government and how Muggles do, besides the wealthy elite has magic tied to their name. That's it.

 

Er...I was always under the impression that his going on and on about the goblin rebellions was not, in fact, all that History of Magic had to offer - otherwise he wouldn't be considered such a joke.

 

Hmm, Snarf, I always thought nobody brought up the 'fundamentals of magic' because they were probably a lot like physics - complex, tedious in spots, and incomprehensible in others. A lot like RL, really - everyone knows that gravity is what makes things fall down, but very few, if anyone, knows why. Hell, people are still debating their way through theories surround gravity, and we still don't have a good answer. We've got laws and equations, but actually understanding the 'truth' behind the matter?

It's rather funny, because fanon has attempted to compensate for this with the 'Magical Theory' course cliche, taught by Dumbledore himself, in which students try and study the 'fundamentals' of how magic works.

But perhaps I have misinterpreted your query, and you're referring to a culturally based approach, the quest to becoming the 'perfect wizard'. If anything, it depends on how different you consider wizards from Muggles, besides the magic. If you believe it makes you an entirely different species (like it seems some purebloods in canon consider it), it becomes an ethical question, one that I wouldn't expect to see taught at Hogwarts. If anything, it's ironic that the teacher who apparently discussed this issue the most in class was none other than Muggle Studies professor and DE Alecto Carrow, and even though her curriculum was fucked up the ass, it took a certain ethical POV.

If you believe, on the other hand, magic is just an extra set of tools, seemingly evident in characters such as Hermione or Snape, the question is as relevant as trying to be 'the perfect person'.

Frankly, I'm not surprised that such queries weren't made in Hogwarts - you don't see ethics taught seriously in high school, and as there aren't any wizarding universities, I'm guessing young witches and wizards just come up with their own ways of thinking.

 

I think this is the center of the Hogwarts experience. Not so much that it's a good magical school because of it's education system, but because it produces good witches/wizards because it encourages them to flourish. My understanding was people like Voldemort or Dumbledore were always going to be great, Hogwarts just brings all the resources together in one convenient place.