24

We know that Voldemort possesses a mind-reading ability called "legilimency". He uses this power to invade the minds of his victims. Existing questions (like this one) ask if Dumbledore can use legilimency. But there's plenty of evidence that he can't. There are various times when another character possesses knowledge that Dumbledore wants, yet he can't get it.

So it seems he can't "extract" information. But he still seems to have some kind of mind-reading ability.

Is it possible that Dumbledore can always tell the truth from a lie?

The biggest clue is that Dumbledore never disbelieves someone who is tells him the truth. Even when everyone else is skeptical, Dumbledore immediately accepts something true when he hears it.

  • He believes that Harry isn't opening the Chamber of Secrets, without asking a single question.

  • Also in Chamber of Secrets, he knows that Harry is hiding something. But he doesn't know exactly what, and has to ask Harry directly, "Is there something you wish to tell me?"

  • He believes the trio in Prisoner of Azkaban, when they claim that Ron's rat Scabbers was actually Peter Pettigrew, and that Sirius Black is innocent. He asks no questions and jumps straight to the fact that nobody else would believe them.

  • He believes Harry when he returns from the graveyard in Goblet of Fire, having no doubt that Voldemort had returned.

  • In Half-Blood Prince, he's aware that the memory he got from Professor Slughorn is a lie. Even though Slughorn (a pretty powerful wizard) thought he could deceive Dumbledore - otherwise, why give the memory at all?

Improve this question
3
  • 21
    Isn't that just called "being clever"?
    – Rand al'Thor ♦
    Jun 9, 2019 at 7:13
  • 9
    No, it actually states that he is a Legilimens
    – Ginge
    Jun 9, 2019 at 14:55
  • It was pretty obvious that Slughorn's memory was faked, since it went misty and even Harry noticed.
    – marcellothearcane
    Jun 11, 2019 at 18:18

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
51

There is no evidence that Dumbledore can't use Legilimency.

In fact, Dumbledore himself says, when they talk about Kreacher:

“And Kreacher told you all this … and laughed?” [Harry] croaked.

“He did not wish to tell me,” said Dumbledore. “But I am a suffi­ciently accomplished Legilimens myself to know when I am being lied to and I — persuaded him — to tell me the full story, before I left for the Department of Mysteries.”

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

The question you referred to has as the accepted answer that Dumbledore didn't know about Harry hearing the basilisk in the Chamber of Secrets, but other answers have different explanations, and being the accepted answer only means that the original poster found it convincing.

As this is also one of your points, so let's address it:

  • Also in Chamber of Secrets, he knows that Harry is hiding something. But he doesn't know exactly what, and has to ask Harry directly, "Is there something you wish to tell me?"

There are at least two explanations for that:

  1. Dumbledore already knows, but wants to find out whether Harry trusts him enough to tell.

  2. What happened when Dumbledore asked that question?

    “I must ask you, Harry, whether there is anything you’d like to tell me,” he said gently. “Anything at all.”

    Harry didn’t know what to say. He thought of Malfoy shouting, “You’ll be next, Mudbloods!” and of the Polyjuice Potion simmer­ing away in Moaning Myrtle’s bathroom. Then he thought of the disembodied voice he had heard twice and remembered what Ron had said: “Hearing voics no one else can hear isn’t a good sign, even in the wizarding world.” He thought, too, about what everyone was saying about him, and his growing dread that he was somehow con­nected with Salazar Slytherin.

    “No,” said Harry. “There isn’t anything, Professor.”

    Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

    What happened is the normal reaction to such a question. Harry thought about all the things he didn't want to tell, and Dumbledore, who, later in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, admits that he is an accomplished Legilimens, gets the information from Harry's unprotected mind.

That covers all occasions where he believes Harry. Especially when Harry returns from the graveyard, the events are still fresh on his mind, as they are after they discover Pettigrew.

With Slughorn the situation may be different. While it is never mentioned, he is probably good enough at occlumency to defend himself.

Improve this answer
8
  • 2
    We imho never see Legilimency at work except for the training of Harry with Snape and there he is absolutely aware that something is done to his mind even though he is not an accomplished occlumens, so I see no evidence that DD uses Legilimency to extract information from Harry in that scene. It is theoretically possible that he can do this in a stealthy way, but again, I see no indication thus far. He might simply respect Harry's wish not to tell him something enough and rely on his clever guesswork. While DD does a lot of scheming and influences people but we rarely see him take [cont]
    – Frank Hopkins
    Jun 9, 2019 at 18:07
  • 4
    a direct forceful approach unless absolutely necessary. In particular he trusts his allies and rather guides them to the right decisions than force them down a certain path. Otherwise agree, that he clearly is a Legilimens and could use that technique to extract information in principle, though he seems not superb at it and since it can be countered, he may simply trust other measures more at times (like the veritaserum).
    – Frank Hopkins
    Jun 9, 2019 at 18:08
  • 9
    @FrankHopkins Snape doesn't teach Harry anything, his approach is like telling an aspiring boxer to defend himself, then punch him in the face. In PS, Voldemort knows that Harry has the stone in his pocket, and Harry didn't notice an intrusion. As you say, DD prefers to be subtle, and using Legilimency undetected is a good way to appear all knowing.
    – QuestionAuthority
    Jun 9, 2019 at 19:31
  • 2
    @Chronocidal We don't know about his personal ethics, but we know that he had no problem "condemning Harry to ten dark and difficult years" (OotP), or "raising him like a pig for slaughter" (DH). So what's a little Legilimency compared to that?
    – QuestionAuthority
    Jun 10, 2019 at 9:14
  • 1
    @QuestionAuthority We don't know he "had no problem" with those things. In fact, judging by his interactions with Harry and the remorse he shows later, doing those things caused him significant distress.
    – DavidS
    Jun 10, 2019 at 14:22
22

Always? No. Dumbledore was fooled all of 4th year when Barty Crouch Jr impersonated Mad Eye Moody. He simply is always unbiased and uses logic. In the other answer, this is shown in all cases:

“He did not wish to tell me,” said Dumbledore. “But I am a suffi­ciently accomplished Legilimens myself to know when I am being lied to and I — persuaded him — to tell me the full story

He probably knew right away that Kreacher would never tell him what he wanted to know. He probably asked nicely, then used Legilimency to get the knowledge that he wanted.

“I must ask you, Harry, whether there is anything you’d like to tell me,” he said gently. “Anything at all.”

He also knows here that Harry won't tell him anything. He's simply testing whether or not he's trusted by Harry. And he isn't.

And all the cases in your question:

He believes that Harry isn't opening the Chamber of Secrets, without asking a single question.

Ah yes, a 12 yo that has next to no knowledge of parseltongue is 1) The heir to Salazar Slytherin and 2) Is opening the chamber regularly and killing people. Makes perfect sense. He of course surmised that this had to do with Voldemort and when Harry brought the diary, he put the pieces together

He believes the trio in Prisoner of Azkaban, when they claim that Ron's rat Scabbers was actually Peter Pettigrew, and that Sirius Black is innocent. He asks no questions and jumps straight to the fact that nobody else would believe them.

Harry's been getting told this entire time that Black is out to get him and that Black killed his parents. So him, along with Hermione (the actual smart one that goes by the book) and Ron (the loyal friend) all saying that Black is innocent? Yes, that's not too hard to believe. Problem is proof is required and they have none.

He believes Harry when he returns from the graveyard in Goblet of Fire, having no doubt that Voldemort had returned.

Not 100% at the time though. He would need confirmation of some sort. He gets it when he interrogates BCJ and he says something along the lines of "You know what this means don't you? The Dark Lord has returned!" So Harry saying he's back, a loyal Death Eater that's saying he's back, and the Dark Mark is clear as day? Not hard at that point to realize Voldemort's back.

In Half-Blood Prince, he's aware that the memory he got from Professor Slughorn is a lie. Even though Slughorn (a pretty powerful wizard) thought he could deceive Dumbledore - otherwise, why give the memory at all?

He had been working on Voldemort for a while. Chances are he didn't initially think it was a lie but after discovering what Voldemort had done and how he'd done it, he probably realized that there's a missing link-and the memory was it.

I forgot that in the book, both Harry and DD recognize that the memory is a fake due to it having different qualities than other memories. Perhaps Slughorn was hoping to fool DD despite the bad memory. He also knew that DD would be coming back for the memory evidenced when Slughorn gets super defensive when asked about it by Harry.

There may actually be more cases than this but being unbiased and using logic were actually quite powerful for him. With one half of the population being out of the loop and the other half scared to death of something whether it be a basilisk or a serial killer or Voldemort, it's easy to see how DD was able to 'see through' everyone.

Improve this answer
6
  • 3
    He trusts Harry to a very high degree, obviously. I'm not sure I'd call that unbiased.
    – sgf
    Jun 9, 2019 at 23:14
  • 5
    Books clearly describe why Dumbledore thinks the "sluggish memory" is tampered. The memory's rendition is incomplete in the Pensieve, where the tampered part looks like a thick mist. Even the inexperienced Harry realizes that something is amiss with the memory. Someone like Dumbledore would have instantly realized that the memory is clearly tampered.
    – sampathsris
    Jun 10, 2019 at 6:03
  • 5
    Moody is not relevant to the question. The real Moody was an experienced, paranoid Auror. He would be a trained Occlumens and detect and attempt by Dumbledore, and he would not be pleased, so Dumbledore wouldn't even try.
    – user102803
    Jun 10, 2019 at 7:13
  • I forgot that both Harry and DD recognize the bad memory. Have edited my post. And yes Harry is trusted, but only to a certain degree. Like in CoS when he asks Harry if he wants to ask anything, Harry flat out lies. DD of course knows this but point is, he knows not to trust what Harry's saying at this point. In later years he's more trusted but DD puts logic and rationality above people's words first. In fact even in the 6th book Harry asks if he can tell Ron and Hermione-DD replies yes but only because he thinks they've proven their loyalty.
    – B. Lalonde
    Jun 10, 2019 at 14:05
  • also Moody is still relevant to the question because he's had to act exactly like the real Moody. DD never did use legilimency to realize MEM was an impostor-he only realized when Moody took Harry away from DD-which is something the real one would've never done. So through the entire year he's acting and talking just like the real Moody would which fools DD.
    – B. Lalonde
    Jun 10, 2019 at 14:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.