I’m not sure how magically plausible this is, but Dumbledore could have simplified the chicken brain dramatically. (See the recent SSC posts for how the number of neurons of an animal correlates with our sense of its moral worth.) Given that the chicken doesn’t need to eat, reproduce, or anything else besides stand and squawk, this seems physically possible. It would be ridiculously difficult without magic, but wizards regularly shrink their brains down to animal size, so apparently magic is an expert neuroscientist. If this was done, the chicken would have almost no moral worth, so it would be permissible to create and torture it.
I don’t think that Dumbledore is someone who think that set fire to “stupid chicken” is ethic
(I might disagree with him, but I think that its not the style of Dumbledore).
Harry probably think thats its not how Dumbledore think/how magic works, so when he was told that its was “fake chicken” he was should saying something like: “But was it a normal chicken?” or “Does magic allow it?”.
I think Dumbledore is (portrayed as) someone who _does_ strongly believe in roles, tropes, and categories, and who thinks death is a tragic, but necessary and inevitable part of life. He would think it absolutely permissible to set fire to a chicken (magical or normal) if there were some reason (including a reason as vague as “necessary to impress Harry that I’m mysterious”).
I’m not sure how magically plausible this is, but Dumbledore could have simplified the chicken brain dramatically. (See the recent SSC posts for how the number of neurons of an animal correlates with our sense of its moral worth.) Given that the chicken doesn’t need to eat, reproduce, or anything else besides stand and squawk, this seems physically possible. It would be ridiculously difficult without magic, but wizards regularly shrink their brains down to animal size, so apparently magic is an expert neuroscientist. If this was done, the chicken would have almost no moral worth, so it would be permissible to create and torture it.
That’s maybe possible, but:
I don’t think that Dumbledore is someone who think that set fire to “stupid chicken” is ethic (I might disagree with him, but I think that its not the style of Dumbledore).
Harry probably think thats its not how Dumbledore think/how magic works, so when he was told that its was “fake chicken” he was should saying something like: “But was it a normal chicken?” or “Does magic allow it?”.
I think Dumbledore is (portrayed as) someone who _does_ strongly believe in roles, tropes, and categories, and who thinks death is a tragic, but necessary and inevitable part of life. He would think it absolutely permissible to set fire to a chicken (magical or normal) if there were some reason (including a reason as vague as “necessary to impress Harry that I’m mysterious”).
But Harry don’t believe in that, so he still was should ask if the chicken was completely normal except it was magical, not?