Skip to main content

harry potter - Why doesn't the Order use unforgivable curses in case of life threatening situations?


Why don't members of the Order of the Phoenix use any of the Unforgivable Curses in life-threatening situations?


I remember Harry (in the last part when he encounters Death eaters) and Dumbledore not using those curses when faced with mortal peril. None of the Order members tried to use these Curses in The battle fought at the end of the Order of the Phoenix.


Do people (Excluding Aurors) not use the Curses as they believe it would ensure a cell in Azkaban; even if they use them in life-threatening situations?



Answer



There are five reasons:





  1. Ethical.


    Both Harry and Dumbledore feel that using Unforgivable curses isn't exactly a Good Thing to do (Harry ends up using them when absolutely required in DH, however).




    • Harry is well known for relying on Expelliarmus (See the Seven Potters battle in DH as well as him using the same on Voldemort in the end)




    • Dumbledore is discussed as possessing knowledge (presumably of powerful dark spells) as deep as Voldemort's but choosing to not use it.





    • Dumbledore specifically is aware that power is his weak point. He understands that he's more in danger of corrupting his soul than Harry from using powerful Dark spells






  2. Practical


    Leaving aside ethics, Harry's not able to use Unforgivables well:





    • Fake Moody (Barty Crouch Jr) explicitly says when teaching them in Year 4 that you can't cast Avada Kedavra unless you're powerful; and if any of them cast it; they would at most give him a nosebleed




    • Harry tries to use Cruciatus on Bellatrix and she sneers at him explaining that you must put the full power of your hatred behind it to make it work






  3. Legal.


    Technically speaking, Unforgivables are illegal. The Ministry would be all too happy to stick the entire Order into Azkaban as you yourself stated, especially before Year 5 was done and Fudge was kicked out. Hell, they wanted to convict Harry for casting a bloody Patronus.





  4. Propaganda.


    It's easier to gold the moral high ground propaganda wise when you don't resort to using Unforgivable curses.


    As an example, witness issues that USA has with holding moral high ground against, say, Iran or North Korea, when detractors can easily bring up "well, let's see, who's the only country to actually drop a nuke on someone?". The nuances and context of decision to use or not use the weapon are irrelevant in that sort of propaganda war.


    Given that the other side here has Rita Skeeter and the Ministry flacks, letting them have the propaganda wins isn't a good approach.




  5. Usefulness.





    • Leaving aside the other two, Crucio isn't really a very useful curse for the Order. They never had a chance or a reason to interrogate someone (never mind real world debate on whether torture is useful during interrogation).




    • When absolutely needed, they use it (they use Imperio during the Potter's Eleven… errr…. the Great Gringotts Robbery)






Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.
Post a Comment
Read more

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...
Post a Comment
Read more

aliens - Interstellar Zoo story

I vaguely remember this story from my childhood: it was about an interstellar zoo that came to Earth with lots of bizarre and unusual species, and humans would file through and gape at all the crazy looking creatures from other planets. The twist came at the end when the perspective shifted to the other side of the bars and we discovered that the "creatures" were traveling through space on a kind of safari. They thought they were the visitors and we were the animals. Neither side knew that the other side thought they were the zoo creatures. Answer Got it. Zoo, by Edward D. Hoch. Published in 1958. Link to Publication History Link to PDF
Post a Comment
Read more

Which Doctor Who works are canon?

I have been watching a Doctor Who documentary and they mentioned that Paul McGann did audio stories so he wasn't just a one-hit Doctor (and that there are novels featuring his Doctor as well). My question is: is Doctor Who canon just the show, or is it like Star Wars where some books and audios are canon and some are not? The documentary also shows that before 2005 they did audio stories where the Doctor is female and obviously that cannot be — not the female part, but the show doesn't count any female Doctors in episodes like The Day of the Doctor . Answer Nothing, and also everything The definitive piece of writing on Doctor Who canon is this blog post by writer Paul Cornell . I'm essentially going to be summarizing his post here, much less eloquently, but one section I want to quote directly is this: Nobody at the BBC has ever uttered a pronouncement about what is and isn't canonical. (As I'm sure they'd put it, being such enthusiasts for good grammar.) Be...
Post a Comment
Read more