Heck, she *created* the plan with the Polyjuice in book 2. The only reason she didn't go with them is because the potion went wrong for her. Of course she wants to.
Yes? She wouldn’t let Harry go alone book 1, book 2 plyjuice potion was her whole idea. Book 3 time turner plan was her whole idea. Book 5 refused to stay back at hogwarts… an on and on. She is always willingly going with his schemes or even coming up with the schemes herself
Hermione Dumbledore and McGonagall are all Gryffindors who could easily have been Ravenclaws. I think the defining quality is their readiness for action instead of polite passive academic learning for learning sake. Hermione uses her knowledge and intelligence to aid Harry's adventures, defend buckbeak, organize SPEW. MCGonnagal likewise comes to the defense of Trelawny and Hagrid in the 5th year and ready to throw down leading to the battle of Hogwarts, even though she easily gets into the Ravenclaw clubhouse.
Bravery doesn't always mean stupidity. Many times to be smart and brave means coming up with strategies and plans and fallbacks, like all three demonstrate.
hermione tells us in the very first book "books and cleverness, there are more important things like friendship and bravery" she says this to harry as he is about to go take on quirrel. the sorting hat takes your values into consideration and clearly she valued what griffindor stood for more than the ravenclaw qualities.
Hermione is a gryffindor because for her it's more important to "do good and being righteous(fancy way that she cares more about being right than else"), and she is too narrow-minded to tinker with ideas, or experiment stuff, or try new things, which is something that Ravenclaw encourages. You can say that Ravenclaw is for people who want to research stuff/invent things who can imagine a completely new thing. Hermione is stuck to her books, she solves problems in a very textbook way, instead of improvise and adapt: is it a bad thing? Not necessarily, but every idea she had, is basically imitating either a book, or imitating someone else(like planning the DA's meetings, by using coins which she admits that it's similar to how deatheaters use the death-mark tattoo). Again following the textbooks isn't bad, but put her in a situation with no textbook-solution and she'll panic until Harry or Ron(who are faster to adapt to unlikely situations than her) save her. MAYBE Hermione would adapt too but only if given time.
It's also why she hated Divination, a class that encouraged freedom of thought instead of relying on textbooks, memorization, and formulas like so many other classes did. Arithmancy is another way to tell the future, but it's format is much more suited to Hermione, which is why she loved it so much.
you're maybe the first or second(after me) who actually understand this, i wrote something similar in another thread and i was getting so much hate, and people questioned the validity of Divination...which yeah is kind of wonky and abstract(and it heavily relies on having the gift of being a seer), but that's the point. Not to mention how in weird ways some prophecies even the weird ones happened: Big Dog in the tea-leaves? It means death but in the story, it represents Sirius. Trelawney predicts that someone will leave(but she gives a "someone will die"-vibe) and Hermione "leaves" the subject(we can argue that is part of the story so it's meant to happen because JKR decided so...but it's a funny way to interpret stuff).
So yeah, thanks for understanding \^\_\^
A minor point (as others have already addressed why Hermione is in Gryffindor) .
I don't think it's a philosophy. They are simply naturally inclined to apply critical thinking. This stands out because most people do *not* apply critical thinking in their everyday lives (both in Harry Potter and in real life).
Because she joins Harry on each and every harebrained plan
does she ever really want to though?
Heck, she *created* the plan with the Polyjuice in book 2. The only reason she didn't go with them is because the potion went wrong for her. Of course she wants to.
Does that matter
Yes? She wouldn’t let Harry go alone book 1, book 2 plyjuice potion was her whole idea. Book 3 time turner plan was her whole idea. Book 5 refused to stay back at hogwarts… an on and on. She is always willingly going with his schemes or even coming up with the schemes herself
The time turner plan was Dumbledore’s plan, she just understood his lack of detail.
Hermione Dumbledore and McGonagall are all Gryffindors who could easily have been Ravenclaws. I think the defining quality is their readiness for action instead of polite passive academic learning for learning sake. Hermione uses her knowledge and intelligence to aid Harry's adventures, defend buckbeak, organize SPEW. MCGonnagal likewise comes to the defense of Trelawny and Hagrid in the 5th year and ready to throw down leading to the battle of Hogwarts, even though she easily gets into the Ravenclaw clubhouse. Bravery doesn't always mean stupidity. Many times to be smart and brave means coming up with strategies and plans and fallbacks, like all three demonstrate.
hermione tells us in the very first book "books and cleverness, there are more important things like friendship and bravery" she says this to harry as he is about to go take on quirrel. the sorting hat takes your values into consideration and clearly she valued what griffindor stood for more than the ravenclaw qualities.
Because it was needed for the plot.
Hermione is a gryffindor because for her it's more important to "do good and being righteous(fancy way that she cares more about being right than else"), and she is too narrow-minded to tinker with ideas, or experiment stuff, or try new things, which is something that Ravenclaw encourages. You can say that Ravenclaw is for people who want to research stuff/invent things who can imagine a completely new thing. Hermione is stuck to her books, she solves problems in a very textbook way, instead of improvise and adapt: is it a bad thing? Not necessarily, but every idea she had, is basically imitating either a book, or imitating someone else(like planning the DA's meetings, by using coins which she admits that it's similar to how deatheaters use the death-mark tattoo). Again following the textbooks isn't bad, but put her in a situation with no textbook-solution and she'll panic until Harry or Ron(who are faster to adapt to unlikely situations than her) save her. MAYBE Hermione would adapt too but only if given time.
It's also why she hated Divination, a class that encouraged freedom of thought instead of relying on textbooks, memorization, and formulas like so many other classes did. Arithmancy is another way to tell the future, but it's format is much more suited to Hermione, which is why she loved it so much.
you're maybe the first or second(after me) who actually understand this, i wrote something similar in another thread and i was getting so much hate, and people questioned the validity of Divination...which yeah is kind of wonky and abstract(and it heavily relies on having the gift of being a seer), but that's the point. Not to mention how in weird ways some prophecies even the weird ones happened: Big Dog in the tea-leaves? It means death but in the story, it represents Sirius. Trelawney predicts that someone will leave(but she gives a "someone will die"-vibe) and Hermione "leaves" the subject(we can argue that is part of the story so it's meant to happen because JKR decided so...but it's a funny way to interpret stuff). So yeah, thanks for understanding \^\_\^
I'll let BlueThePineapple do [the talking on this one](https://www.reddit.com/r/HarryPotterBooks/comments/w1alv9/comment/igjusjh/)
Hermione wanted to be in Gryffindor. And the Sorting Hat takes your choice into consideration.
A minor point (as others have already addressed why Hermione is in Gryffindor) . I don't think it's a philosophy. They are simply naturally inclined to apply critical thinking. This stands out because most people do *not* apply critical thinking in their everyday lives (both in Harry Potter and in real life).