Magic in HP is a bit weird because you have to have innate ability and
you have to study at length to learn how to use it.>>13748
Hermione has the magic gene or whatever it is that lets her do magic. She's not a muggle, just her parents are. It's unclear if there's something like a recessive gene or whatever but some magic users are born to muggles and some non-magic users are born to magic-users. It's kind of implied that having a scientific or muggle-oriented approach to magic is actually helpful, because people like Hermione or Arthur Weasley get good results thanks to their curiosity and experimentation.>>13763
Yes except it doesn't seem to have anything to do with blood purity. IIRC there was somebody from a pureblood family with no magic. One of the Black family I think. One of Harry's neighbors is also a squib (which is how the books introduce the idea), and so is Filch.>>13749>Yeah, I think Muggles are more uninformed than unable.
No, they are 100% unable, as are the "squibs" who are born to wizard families but can't do magic. You need the mojo to be able to do magic at all. How good a study you are just influences your aptitude.>I'm not sure if the science and magic in fantasy is really comparable, if you mean scientific method
HP plays with that. The wizard world uses antiquated technology (Harry's first year is 1991-1992) and supposedly certain more modern technology malfunctions in areas with a lot of magic like Hogwartz (although that could be a spell that does that intentionally). One of the themes of the story is that the wizards are kind of backward because they're insular and think they're superior to muggles and ignore their technology. Like there's the bit where Arthur Weasley got bit by the magic snake and wizard medicine wasn't able to help him but muggle medicine worked. Most wizards also don't seem to have a deep understanding of magic and how it works, but just say the words and do the gestures to make stuff happen, so their understanding of magic isn't scientific at all really.