Love Potion, Huge Violation of 3rd Law?

[Mr. Death]

I'll conceded that Morgan probably didn't know about the love potion.

But as a point of order: The Third Law says "Thou Shalt Not (Use Magic to) Invade the Mind of Another." Neither the production nor the consumption of a love potion violates that law.

The production of the love potion -- and any other potion -- involves using magic. The text is explicit about this.

As the potion is magic, any changes it makes in a person are magical in nature, and thus part of the law. Note in Turn Coat, how Peabody's law violations are centered around his inks, i.e., a potion he concocted to break the laws of magic.

[Paviel]

The production of the love potion -- and any other potion -- involves using magic. The text is explicit about this.

It uses magic, yes.

That magic does not invade anyone's mind, which is what the Third Law prohibits.

Invading someone's mind would be what Molly did in "Proven Guilty." Love potions don't do that.

[Mr. Death]

Fair enough.

It would be a Fourth Law violation, if it was any.

[Mr. Death]

As a note, Harry's love potion still isn't a law violation. But a more "traditional" love potion (i.e., whoever drinks this will fall in love with me, specifically), would be.

[Paviel]

I don't think there have ever been any "traditional" love potions in the Dresden Files, have there?

The Third and Fourth Laws might be the reason why not.

[forumghost]

Yeah, all Harry made was something like a magic roofie/anti-inhibitor/Viagra drug.

It's skeevie as hell (assuming that you intend to use it) but not actually illegal under the Laws of Magic.

[Mr. Death]

I don't think there have ever been any "traditional" love potions in the Dresden Files, have there?

The Third and Fourth Laws might be the reason why not.

We haven't seen any, and you're right that that's probably why.

The closest is probably that belt from Love Hurts.

[Arjan]

Doesn't matter if it's voluntarily taken or not.

Altering someone else's mind is a violation.

Besides, you've never heard of someone drugging someone's drink? Choosing to drink something doesn't mean you willfully and knowingly consent to everything that's in that drink.

Actually with mind magic permission is everything otherwise the gatekeeper could not even start helping Peabody's many victims.

So even if the potion is mind altering (not according to the rpg as quoted earlier) and even if there is no difference between giving someone a potion to drink and using magic directly (there might be no moral difference if you deceive someone into drinking it but the laws of magic are not about morals and technicalities can make a huge difference, that is why the wardens can use magic swords to kill people)

Even then there is consent. If you tell someone what the potion is and what it does the consent is everything. With consent it is not an invasion. It can be seen as a medicine in certain circumstances.

Besides if you make a potion bomb you can kill people but if you use it on fairies it is ok. So you just say to the next warden those love potions are for use on fairies. Or for your own consumption, it certainly will cure your shyness, maybe in small doses it will just give you some courage to do what you want to do anyway.

[forumghost]

I mean why spend hours brewing a potion when you can just do the old Jedi Mind Trick anyways?

[Mr. Death]

Actually with mind magic permission is everything otherwise the gatekeeper could not even start helping Peabody's many victims.

So even if the potion is mind altering (not according to the rpg as quoted earlier) and even if there is no difference between giving someone a potion to drink and using magic directly (there might be no moral difference if you deceive someone into drinking it but the laws of magic are not about morals and technicalities can make a huge difference, that is why the wardens can use magic swords to kill people)

Even then there is consent. If you tell someone what the potion is and what it does the consent is everything. With consent it is not an invasion. It can be seen as a medicine in certain circumstances.

Besides if you make a potion bomb you can kill people but if you use it on fairies it is ok. So you just say to the next warden those love potions are for use on fairies. Or for your own consumption, it certainly will cure your shyness, maybe in small doses it will just give you some courage to do what you want to do anyway.

I think that depends on whether we're talking about the practical application of the law or the cosmic-application of the law.

Getting affirmative consent to look in someone's mind might get the White Council off your back, but that doesn't mean you're not being tainted by the use of black magic.

[Paviel]

Getting affirmative consent to look in someone's mind might get the White Council off your back, but that doesn't mean you're not being tainted by the use of black magic.

Isn't that what a Soulgaze is?

I could see some one-way equivalent to a Soulgaze being black magic, but the worst that happens during a regular two-way Soulgaze is that each person gets a good look at the other's soul and can never forget it.

[Arjan]

I think that depends on whether we're talking about the practical application of the law or the cosmic-application of the law.

Getting affirmative consent to look in someone's mind might get the White Council off your back, but that doesn't mean you're not being tainted by the use of black magic.

When talking about the laws of magic only the practical application is meaningful.

Someone says every use of mind magic taints you but nobody measured that. It could very well be that the act of giving permission is enough to keep it clean. It is not always the magic itself that is dirty, it is the application of it.

Because any act of magic is a choice to do something, a choice that can change you. Those choices reenforce themselves and some of those choices are black or grey.

Basically if you say a certain deed will taint you you say you disapprove of that deed. Well I think true well informed consent makes it OK. The technical application of the law is on my side and I hope that was based on something.

And maybe stealing with magic will taint you whatever the council says.

[Mira]

I'll conceded that Morgan probably didn't know about the love potion.

But as a point of order: The Third Law says "Thou Shalt Not (Use Magic to) Invade the Mind of Another." Neither the production nor the consumption of a love potion violates that law.

A love potion may not directly enter a mind as in going in and reading it..  So in that sense it doesn't violate the Law, however it does alter the drinker's mind and thinking which violates the spirit of the Law..

[Fcrate]

I don't think that Morgan didn't know about the love potion. I mean come ON.. miss 2 naked people running around? he did see the demon, and the end of the fight. One girl who was out of her mind, and naked. hmmm. Not hard math there.
Mira: Laws are about their letter, not the spirit. According to the ruling bodies anyway.

[Paviel]

A love potion may not directly enter a mind as in going in and reading it..  So in that sense it doesn't violate the Law, however it does alter the drinker's mind and thinking which violates the spirit of the Law.

It doesn't matter what violates the spirit of the Laws of Magic, only the letter.

Otherwise Harry would have been executed for reanimating Sue in Dead Beat.

The Laws of Magic aren't designed to enforce any specific morality, only to mitigate the dangers inherent in specific magical practices. Even the First Law prohibits killing with magic not because killing is wrong, but specifically because using magic to kill is dangerous on a metaphysical level. So too are all of the uses of magic specifically prohibited by the Laws.

Brewing love potions as they exist in the Dresden Files, however, is not.