Hermione Philosophizes
One charm among many in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, the seventh and concluding book in the wonderful series by J.K. Rowling, is an exchange between Harry’s friend Hermione Granger and one Xenophilius Lovegood, a believer in the legend of the Deathly Hallows. The Deathly Hallows are magical objects, and Hermione, ever the skeptic, questions whether one of them can possibly be real. The following conversation ensues:
“Prove that it is not,” said Xenophilius.
Hermione looked outraged.
“But that’s - I’m sorry, but that’s completely ridiculous! How can I possibly prove it doesn’t exist? … I mean, you could claim that anything’s real if the only basis for believing in it is that nobody’s proved it doesn’t exist!”
“Yes, you could,” said Xenophilius. “I am glad to see that you are opening your mind a little.”
Fifty points for Gryffindor! Hermione’s got it exactly right.
Believers often claim that skeptics are close-minded. But who is really close-minded, the skeptic, who insists on evidence before bestowing belief, or the believer, whose faith is rock solid, unassailable, and impervious, both to evidence, and the lack thereof?
lon wrote:
I started preparing an essay on “closed mindedness”, but it’s taking longer than expected and I wanted to toss something out for this post (which is unrelated to the open/closed minded thing anyway).
I just want to point out that you found a concept in a fictional book which you have found useful to present your opinion. The fact that Hermione also believes that she can fly on a stick did not deter you from extracting this relatively tiny passage and presenting it as an illustration of a truth.
I’d just like to thank you for verifying that it’s indeed acceptable cite fictional works when trying to present one’s point of view, as I personally tire of having my point of view discounted simply because I happened to cite works which are accused of being fictional when I’m trying to present my viewpoint.
I can hear the counter argument already, having to do with the difference in citing something to present a point of view versus citing something as justification for a point of view. And I’d agree that that counterpoint does sucessfully work against many people who argue the same viewpoint that I present. But you are also aware that the only parts of the Bible that I believe are even remotely authoratative are a distinct, extremely small subset of the whole thing, and when I quote from other places, I’m not using it as justification, but as illustration.
Posted 28 Jul 2007 at 7:48 pm ¶