Login  
 
 
Go Back   Chamber of Secrets > MuggleNet Editorials > General Editorial

A Theory of Magic



Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old April 5th, 2007, 3:48 am
more2live4  Female.gif more2live4 is offline
MuggleNet Editorial
 
Joined: 2793 days
Posts: 0
A Theory of Magic

This is to discuss A Theory of Magic by Taure.


Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old April 5th, 2007, 6:17 am
Perman  Undisclosed.gif Perman is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3390 days
Posts: 0
Re: A Theory of Magic

Hmm.. strange editorial. Though it was certainly interresting, I had a hard time keeping it up as it's so long and since it's essentially impossible to determine whether or not the "taurists" or "neo-merlins" are correct since Rowlings dealing with the nature of magic seems murky at best, and I doubt she's created a coherent system.


Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old April 5th, 2007, 7:04 am
DocHoliday88  Undisclosed.gif DocHoliday88 is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 2720 days
Posts: 0
Re: A Theory of Magic

An interesting editorial, but I just have to point out one thing; Wizards and Muggles are NOT separate species. Speciation usually implies that the two may not interbreed, or if they do so, the offspring will be sterile, eg. a horse and a donkey breeding to create a mule with an odd number of chromosomes. Next, if there were a 'wizard' allele as you have put it, it would absolutely not be recessive. Look at Tom Riddle, or Seamus Finnigan (or others, even Hagrid): One wizard parent, one non-wizard, yet they all have magical abilities, showing that the 'wizard' allele is dominant. Dominant does not necessarily mean more common. Lastly, for Muggle-borns to become wizards, or for wizard-borns to become squibs, (assuming a 'wizard' allele) there would have to be a mutation in the coding of their DNA. Mutations do not create an entirely different species (X-Men and the Hulk aren't real!), but rather small changes. Sorry about the biology lecture, but it was just bugging me


Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old April 5th, 2007, 9:39 am
sfgilgalad  Undisclosed.gif sfgilgalad is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3300 days
Posts: 0
Re: A Theory of Magic

Funny. I think we should burn them all !!


Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old April 5th, 2007, 9:43 am
Taure  Male.gif Taure is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3430 days
Location: England
Age: 26
Posts: 76
Re: A Theory of Magic

No, the wizard allele has to be recessive - if it were dominant, then the parents of Muggleborns would be wizards and witches themselves, not Muggles. Therefore it must be recessive.

Anyway, as you can see, the essay was written in a style that was supposed to be similar to Fantastic Beasts and QttA - as if magic were real. This particular treatise was written by a pureblood supremacist, and so he will have exaggerated the difference between Muggles and Magical people.

It would probably be more accurate to say that wizards and Muggles are different sub-species, like different breeds of dog. Vastly different, yet able to interbreed.

Quote:
X-Men and the Hulk aren't real!
Neither's Harry Potter lol. The idea was that although it was one mutation, it coded for an enzyme that changes large amounts of the whole of the DNA.


Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old April 5th, 2007, 9:54 am
bribe
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: A Theory of Magic

An interesting editorial, although somewhat on the long side, and certainly worth a laugh. It made a pleasent change from some of the editorials that have been published recently. I am glad you pointed out in your own reply that Harry Potter is not real because some people seem to have forgotten this fact.


Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old April 5th, 2007, 10:35 am
Yopheid Yopheid is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3043 days
Posts: 0
Re: A Theory of Magic

Interesting column, but I don't agree on all accounts. I agree with Doc,that wizards and muggles can't be considered different species. But I agree with taure that the allele for witchcraft can't be a dominant one. On the other hand it can't really be a recessive genom, either. Muggleborn wizards are quite common, and one would assume that they generally marry, and breed with other wizards. As soon as one muggleborn wizard breeds with a muggleborn witch, the probability is 25 % that the kid will be a squib. Given the huge stigmata of being a squib, I assume that it is much more rare. Afterall, we've seen plenty of evidence that there are few pure-blood families out there. This means that muggle genoms should abound, making squibs quite common. Maybe being magic, is not about biology, nor about social environment or education, but simply a question of - magic.


Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old April 5th, 2007, 11:19 am
Taure  Male.gif Taure is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3430 days
Location: England
Age: 26
Posts: 76
Re: A Theory of Magic

Yeah - JKR did confirm on her site that the passing on of magic is genetic though. In an article about Squibs in the misc. section, she said something like "the magic gene is a resilient one".

What exactly this means is up in the air, but I took it to be that once a person becomes magical, magic itself makes sure that, somehow, the children are magical despite that 25% chance, though this seems to fail sometimes. I dunno.


Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old April 5th, 2007, 5:09 pm
inkling7  Female.gif inkling7 is offline
Banned
 
Joined: 3243 days
Location: Middle Earth
Posts: 1,150
Re: A Theory of Magic

Remember we are talking about a completely fictional world not about the real world - so anything is possible..... It's all about JK's imagination - just the same as The Lord of the Rings was Tolkiens world - Harry Potter is Rowling's world. Each has it's own verson of magic according to its author's imagination. Remember that then and join in with their magical viewpoints to enjoy the stories


Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old April 5th, 2007, 10:22 pm
TKoko  Male.gif TKoko is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 2766 days
Location: Minnesota
Age: 23
Posts: 3
Re: A Theory of Magic

I like it. It really was well thought out and researched. It is obvious that you spent a lot of time on it. I will have to read it over again I think I skipped a part.
Nice work


__________________
TKoko


It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.
Dumbledore
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old April 6th, 2007, 12:51 am
le_professeur  Undisclosed.gif le_professeur is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3260 days
Posts: 1
Re: A Theory of Magic

If not for a few grammatical errors and typos, I would say this editorial had been written by JKRowling herself, using a pen name and all the vast, amassed information and details she has conjured with her pen over the last 15 or so years. Bravo!


Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old April 6th, 2007, 2:57 am
limecoconut3  Female.gif limecoconut3 is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 2805 days
Posts: 49
Re: A Theory of Magic

I was beginning to think that the mugglenet editorials (judging by some of the more recent ones) were past the drain and into the sewer, but this editorial may have proven me wrong, thank you!


Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old April 6th, 2007, 12:37 pm
becklenay  Undisclosed.gif becklenay is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3053 days
Location: South Central PA; USA
Age: 44
Posts: 2
Re: A Theory of Magic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taure View Post
No, the wizard allele has to be recessive - if it were dominant, then the parents of Muggleborns would be wizards and witches themselves, not Muggles. Therefore it must be recessive.
Sorry, but JKR herself said that the gene was dominant. She admits, however, that biology is not her strong suit. It has been preposed that becoming a witch/wizard must involve more than one allele to be present (like eye color). The theory of multiple dominant allele is the only one that would really work in JKR's world as it allows for both muggleborns and squibs while adhering to her statement of dominance.
This theory also explains why some witch/wizards are so adamant about maintaning 'pure blood' status. The more that witches/wizards marry outside the magical community, the more likely that their offspring would be missing one of the allele and be born a squib.



Last edited by becklenay; April 6th, 2007 at 12:41 pm.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old April 6th, 2007, 4:02 pm
Indy_Racer  Undisclosed.gif Indy_Racer is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 2884 days
Posts: 28
Re: A Theory of Magic

I liked this editorial. It did take a lot of my muggle concentration to read. Don't know how that is going to affect my abilities to do muggle activities for a while.

Based on this editorial, how would you explain what happened to Merope when she died? Dumbledore talked about the fact that wizards could lose their ability to do magic. Merope's magical ability certainly was affected by her abusive father. However, if magic is unlimited I'd still like to here the author of this editorial go into greater detail on how someone could lose their abilities.


Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old April 6th, 2007, 4:13 pm
Harry10  Undisclosed.gif Harry10 is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 2761 days
Posts: 27
Re: A Theory of Magic

This was an absolutely cracking essay. Very enjoyable.
Still I do have to point out some mistakes. Your assertion that wizards could not produce a ball of light without a wand may come as surprise to Remus Lupin as one of the first things that he did in POA was conjure a ball of silver fire in the palm of his hand.
As to the genetics, I suspect the answer is more likely to be that the magical gene is a dominant one, but for some unknown reason comes with an on/off switch. Under some unknown magical law it can be switched on, thus allowing muggleborns to exist, and under rarer circumstances still switched off, thus explaining squibs.


Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old April 6th, 2007, 7:04 pm
Taure  Male.gif Taure is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3430 days
Location: England
Age: 26
Posts: 76
Re: A Theory of Magic

Quote:
Based on this editorial, how would you explain what happened to Merope when she died? Dumbledore talked about the fact that wizards could lose their ability to do magic. Merope's magical ability certainly was affected by her abusive father. However, if magic is unlimited I'd still like to here the author of this editorial go into greater detail on how someone could lose their abilities.
This would be a more severe case of what happened to Tonk's in HBP. Tonks was depressed, which affected her mental state, which in turn affected her magic. So the same thing would have happened with Merope, but with greater severity.

Quote:
Your assertion that wizards could not produce a ball of light without a wand may come as surprise to Remus Lupin as one of the first things that he did in POA was conjure a ball of silver fire in the palm of his hand.
The fire was in his hand, but he may have conjured it with a wand. A ball of light is ambiguous though - it may be possible - what I was talking about would more be streams of light coming from people's fingers (like a lumos spell), or people chucking Avada Kedavra's from their palms. As a ball of light is not emerging from the body like this, but rather is coming into existence in the air outside the body, it could be said that the ball of light is allowed.

I still stick with my earlier statement though - that Lupin's hand-flames were conjured by a wand - he is simply holding them.


__________________
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old April 6th, 2007, 7:50 pm
eaglek13  Undisclosed.gif eaglek13 is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 2806 days
Posts: 0
Re: A Theory of Magic

Interesting article. I liked the bits on non-focal and non-verbal magic.


Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old April 6th, 2007, 8:41 pm
Anna_bella  Female.gif Anna_bella is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3451 days
Location: England
Age: 29
Posts: 5
Re: A Theory of Magic

Interesting article.

If you fully agree with it you could be classed as a Deatheater or Voldy himself. This article supports his crede! with the wizarding gene being dominant.

I think that wizards and muggles are two diffrent sub-species that seems correct as if they are two seperate species more support Voldy has!

I also think that wizards can do accidental magic after 17 years old if they are in a really dangerous situation e.g walking on a railway line and a train comes and you did not see it you magcial defences kick in and transport you some else like Longbottom bouced out of a window!

It is true that all wizards have the potential for great magic but not all reach it due to not working hard enough and practising their skills e.g Harry worked hard and practised his patronous to become competant at the spell. Longbottom worked really hard for his A in transfiguration.

There is of course that fact that not all wizards have equal power and some have greater talents for different fields e.g Harry defence of the dark arts, Longbottom herbology and charms and Voldy dark magic and transfiguration!

It all comes back to the nature /nurture debate!
We know that in the end it involves both you Nature (talents and traits your born with)
and
Nurture (what talents you choose to develop and your enviroment and influnces e.g parents,friends and teachers ect)

A Wizards develops by using what talents their born with and then it really is up to how hard they work to develop them. The Dark Lord himself had great talent and he worked even harder to make stronger.
Harry himself has worked hard to devleop his skills as has Longbottom!

In short do not be a lazy wizard or you could end up like Peter who really is a wizards who clearly has got skills if he had only chosen to develop them and not really on stronger friends!

As one wise man said "It is are choices who show us who we truly are."

The dark lord may be evil but at least he developed his skills and abilty to the best they could be!
This could not be said of many a good person!So be a good person who devleops your skills and see how far you go!



Last edited by Anna_bella; April 6th, 2007 at 8:44 pm. Reason: Spelling
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old April 6th, 2007, 9:14 pm
Indy_Racer  Undisclosed.gif Indy_Racer is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 2884 days
Posts: 28
Re: A Theory of Magic

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anna_bella View Post
The dark lord may be evil but at least he developed his skills and abilty to the best they could be!
This could not be said of many a good person!So be a good person who devleops your skills and see how far you go!
Interesting point. This ties nicely into the 'terrible but great statement' that Ollivander makes about Voldemort in SS/PS when Harry gets his wand.


Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old April 6th, 2007, 10:34 pm
FelixiaFelicis  Female.gif FelixiaFelicis is offline
First Year
 
Joined: 3021 days
Age: 33
Posts: 0
Re: A Theory of Magic

This was such a fun article to read! I really like your theories about the origin and nature of magic. Particularly the bit about the runic base of magic which corresponds to wand movements and incantations.

One small detail: when Snape was "teaching" Harry Occlumency, and he was using Legilimency to probe Harry's mind, Snape was holding his wand and he said an incantation: "Legilimens." (OoTP p.534)

Since I think we can consider Legilimency and Occlumency to be two sides of the same magical coin, then there must be a focused base to the technique.

I still think you are correct in classifying it as a technique, though, because in the majority of times we see Dumbledore, Voldemort and Snape using Legilimency or Occlumency they appear to be doing it all through mental effort without a wand or an incantation. However, the three of them are extremely "Authoritative" talented wizards. Maybe they have turned the focused, verbal skill into a non-focused, non-verbal skill.


__________________
I solemnly swear that I am up to no good.

Last edited by FelixiaFelicis; April 6th, 2007 at 10:38 pm.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back  Chamber of Secrets > MuggleNet Editorials > General Editorial

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 2:50 pm.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Original content is Copyright MMII - MMVIII, CoSForums.com. All Rights Reserved.
Other content (posts, images, etc) is Copyright its respective owners.