QUOTE(fidelia @ Jan 25 2009, 10:43 PM)

I love all of the imagery of the Hopping Pot mentioned above! My question, though, is that if the Hopping Pot is indeed a sort of "traveling conscience" - how valuable is it really to have a conscious that hounds us into making the right decisions? Doesn't the Hopping Pot rather go against the concept of "Free Will?" If we make the right choice only because something (or somebody) else makes life intolerable for us if we don't, is there really any free will or growth involved? Does the person learn anything other than responding, in a Pavlovian type of way, to external stimulus? Whatever happened to the internal stirrings of conscience? Nah. In this tale, the only driving force is to quiet the Hopping Pot. We seem to be short on freedom to make choices, good and bad, and learn from them, in this tale.
I think you raise some interesting questions. I think some of them were answered nicely by Wandguardnoodle too QUOTE(Wandguardnoodle @ Jan 26 2009, 07:11 AM)

This wizard kind of reminds me of Snape (as much as I hate that almost every discussion leads to him dry.). Snape joins the good side 'cause he can't take the fact he led Voldemort to Lily and that's what Dumbledore asks (but still remains fascinated by dark arts and remains a git tongue.); and this wizard starts doing good 'cause he can't take the pot banging at his heels.
I think Snape is very much like this wizard in the Hopping Pot in certain respects. He is also hounded by a 'bad conscience.' Snape is improved by his bad conscience but it doesn't really make him into a wonderful person. The wizard in the Hopping Pot is quite selfish, he will never be as genuinely helpful as his father. But he is at least improved by a bad conscience...as was Snape. Whether or not it is a sort of Pavlovian response, it changes the behavior. Isn't a conscience largely just that we become aware that there are negative consequences to being selfish? It usually comes back to bite us when we are purely selfish, just like the Hopping Pot...so in that sense I think it IS Pavlovian. We change because we feel embarrassed, or hurt by social rejection or by the consequences of something that we caused to happen/or didn't help prevent, in our selfishness - it bites us emotionally, if not physically.
The wizard in the tale seems to be a very selfish person, and his father probably realized it. It is as though his father created an external conscience for his son, because he realized that he didn't have a very active internal one. He needed some Pavlovian training! But maybe the father was like him when he was young too and someone or something had to train him to be be less selfish as well. We just don't know. But Snape changed because fate bit him, Lily died because of his selfish power trip to rise up as a Death Eater. Even though it was an external thing that caused it, he internalized the external consequence and willingly changed his behavior.
It is similar with Dumbledore...his selfish games with Grindelwald caused his sister's death, and although the hurt was initially external, he also learned a lesson about selfishness....he internalized his hurt and developed a bad conscience, which stopped him from becoming a Voldemort!
I suppose I don't see a 'bad conscience' really being pitted against our 'free will.' If we go back to the Dumbledore case, Dumbledore made a very clear decision to mend his ways, and it was done of his own free will. I suppose I see conscience being one's sort of 'alter-ego' in some respects, although I think it is highly influenced by the culture in which one lives and by a Pavlovian cause and effect as well. There is always the one side of us that wants to be selfish - just to take and take and use and use and do nothing for others. Then there is the social pressure to have sympathy for others and to help people when they need help. On an internal level, even though it might be initiated by social pressure or physical or mental torment because of some consequence, there is usually a part of ourselves that can eventually see themselves in someone else's shoes. So when someone finally chooses to change their attitude and behavior, it isn't really a defeat of 'free will,' but more a defeat of 'selfishness.'
I think that a conscience is part of free will.
Viewing the Hopping Pot as totally an outside/social influence would go against the free will of someone who wanted to be completely selfish. But a conscience is really more internal. It is really the better half of one's free will, rather than its external enemy.
I can see why you say that the wizard doesn't seem to learn anything from the Hopping Pot in the story - even if his behavior is altered by it. It isn't clearly stated. But if you just look at the Pot as a symbol of his internal alter-ego, rather than an external annoyance, then it just seems to be the same mechanism that is at work in all of our consciences. But I do think that the wizard clearly exercises his free will to stop the Pot from annoying him.
I guess I just see the Hopping Pot as a symbol, rather than a literal annoying hopping pot. I think it was probably written as a metaphor.
This post has been edited by chloe squibbulus: Jan 30 2009, 10:08 PM