Besides, Dumbledore could have made him promise more explicitly off-screen and this is just Moody doing the same independently or reiterating it.
This is quite possible. However, it does not sound like Moody’s reiterating. And I find it improbable that Dumbledore included the “don’t touch a pen” clause (that’s more Moody’s style), but no other clause, and then Moody independently, coincidentally added that clause and no other clause.
I claim that in normal human communication that type of exchange is viewed as B accepting what A says, unless B somehow signals explicit disagreement. Then, if B knows this, and assumes that A thinks likes this, and only explicitly affirms understanding while withholding knowledge of their disagreement, B is at the very least deceiving A.
Of course Moody should know to be more paranoid in what he forbids Harry from doing. Especially with him having witnessed Harry showing cunning and paranoia on a level he finds promising.
That’s not a promise. It’s not even agreement.
This is quite possible. However, it does not sound like Moody’s reiterating. And I find it improbable that Dumbledore included the “don’t touch a pen” clause (that’s more Moody’s style), but no other clause, and then Moody independently, coincidentally added that clause and no other clause.
A: ”. [] Do you understand?” B: “I understand.”
I claim that in normal human communication that type of exchange is viewed as B accepting what A says, unless B somehow signals explicit disagreement. Then, if B knows this, and assumes that A thinks likes this, and only explicitly affirms understanding while withholding knowledge of their disagreement, B is at the very least deceiving A.
Of course Moody should know to be more paranoid in what he forbids Harry from doing. Especially with him having witnessed Harry showing cunning and paranoia on a level he finds promising.