it won’t harm their bond if Draco doesn’t remember it
I doubt that’s true in the purely consequentialist sense, and I don’t expect Lucius to think like a consequentialist.
A major violation of trust from the person Draco cares about and respects most of all, seems like exactly the sort of damage that could survive Obliviation (as McGonagall hinted in Chapter 6).
And my model of Lucius would not want to violate Draco’s trust, even if Draco couldn’t remember it—he genuinely cares about being a good father to Draco. Old-fashioned nobles believe in virtue ethics, if any.
I don’t. But I think I have a better model of what sorts of things Harry has been up to with Draco, than Dumbledore does.
I think Dumbledore thinks that “whatever you have done with Draco” is one thing, and will be most salient to Draco. He’s not expecting the Bayesian Conspiracy, and Draco’s Patronus, and Harry’s Patronus, and discovering that the blood purist hypothesis is false, and actually becoming friends with Hermione, and becoming pregnant with Harry’s baby, and trying to reform Slytherin house, and so on...
So, if I’m understanding you correctly, you think that Lucius giving Draco Veritaserum is not in itself a violation of his trust?
In the context of “assume Lucius will know” “he’ll give him Veritaserum” the clear implication is that Lucius would use enough Veritaserum to make answering involuntary, which would seem a clear violation of trust to me.
Right, I assumed that the Veritaserum itself was just necessary as part of the legal process, for outside observers to make sure Draco isn’t lying, and that instance is what they were talking about. Even in that context, “Tell me things you wouldn’t want to tell me normally” is a violation of trust.
Okay, back up even further. You think that investigating Aurors will give a child victim Veritaserum and then leave him alone with someone else before it wears off? That’s horrifying.
No, I thought that the investigating Aurors would not give a child Veritaserum without his legal guardian there, and thus Lucius would have access to whatever Draco said under Veritaserum. It occurs to me now that Lucius wouldn’t be too prying in front of Aurors.
On reflection, I do believe I have a better model of Lucius than Dumbledore does. I’ve read a lot of the same fanfic as the author has and I know a decent amount about the author’s thought processes, neither of which is true of Dumbledore. And Dumbledore thinks of people in absolutes, and would probably think Lucius is incapable of honestly wanting to be a good father to Draco since he’s “Dark”.
I doubt that’s true in the purely consequentialist sense, and I don’t expect Lucius to think like a consequentialist.
A major violation of trust from the person Draco cares about and respects most of all, seems like exactly the sort of damage that could survive Obliviation (as McGonagall hinted in Chapter 6).
And my model of Lucius would not want to violate Draco’s trust, even if Draco couldn’t remember it—he genuinely cares about being a good father to Draco. Old-fashioned nobles believe in virtue ethics, if any.
So, for what reason do you believe you have a better model of Lucius than Dumbledore does?
I don’t. But I think I have a better model of what sorts of things Harry has been up to with Draco, than Dumbledore does.
I think Dumbledore thinks that “whatever you have done with Draco” is one thing, and will be most salient to Draco. He’s not expecting the Bayesian Conspiracy, and Draco’s Patronus, and Harry’s Patronus, and discovering that the blood purist hypothesis is false, and actually becoming friends with Hermione, and becoming pregnant with Harry’s baby, and trying to reform Slytherin house, and so on...
So, if I’m understanding you correctly, you think that Lucius giving Draco Veritaserum is not in itself a violation of his trust?
In the context of “assume Lucius will know” “he’ll give him Veritaserum” the clear implication is that Lucius would use enough Veritaserum to make answering involuntary, which would seem a clear violation of trust to me.
Right, I assumed that the Veritaserum itself was just necessary as part of the legal process, for outside observers to make sure Draco isn’t lying, and that instance is what they were talking about. Even in that context, “Tell me things you wouldn’t want to tell me normally” is a violation of trust.
Okay, back up even further. You think that investigating Aurors will give a child victim Veritaserum and then leave him alone with someone else before it wears off? That’s horrifying.
No, I thought that the investigating Aurors would not give a child Veritaserum without his legal guardian there, and thus Lucius would have access to whatever Draco said under Veritaserum. It occurs to me now that Lucius wouldn’t be too prying in front of Aurors.
Why are you not assuming that Lucius could get his hands on Veritaserum himself and interrogate Draco later in private?
If we wanted to assume he would do that, we could assume that at any time—Harry should have been just as worried after the Christmas break.
On reflection, I do believe I have a better model of Lucius than Dumbledore does. I’ve read a lot of the same fanfic as the author has and I know a decent amount about the author’s thought processes, neither of which is true of Dumbledore. And Dumbledore thinks of people in absolutes, and would probably think Lucius is incapable of honestly wanting to be a good father to Draco since he’s “Dark”.