The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas

1163 Words3 Pages

The Unsettling Choice: Examining Moral Dimensions in Omelas and Um Helat Twenty men are captured by pirates and you are presented with a moral dilemma: The first option is to sacrifice one man, allowing the other nineteen to live. Should the sacrifice not be carried out, then all twenty men will die. What would you do with that? Deciding on either option can be perceived as both morally acceptable or questionable, as there are a multitude of philosophies that offer justification for each choice. The story “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” by Ursula K. Le Guin suggests that it is morally acceptable to kill one person for the others to live. Alternatively, the story, “The Ones Who Stay and Fight” by N.K. Jemisin suggests that there is a collective …show more content…

Instead of letting the daughter of the father suffer even more, the social workers offered help to her. As this place “is Um-Helat, [...], where a pitiful, diseased child matters” (Jemisin 11) the social workers keep her in quarantine and constantly check on this child. Once the girl is able to accept their help, the social workers in return will explain why her father had to die. “She’s early for the knowledge, but something must be done, [...]” (Jemisin 11). This would suggest that Jemisin believes that there is a way towards a utopian world where problems are not left unresolved. Notice that, we aren’t avoiding the problem at all, but rather facing it. In Le Guins story, we are challenged with a situation of the poor child suffering for the citizens happiness. There is nothing that can be done to help this child without the consequence of the overall happiness of the people of Omelas. On the contrary, Jemisin’s story displays an alike situation, with the exception of there being a solution. The solution being that the girl did not have to suffer alone, but with others to overcome this …show more content…

Examining our two stories, we find that this philosophical belief is implemented. We refer to the child situation from Le Guins story again, where the entirety of Omelas’s happiness lies under. The argument over whether to help the innocent child is complicated. From a utilitarian standpoint, helping the child out is not the optimal ethical choice, as it is based on the greatest amount of good for the greatest number. may need to add another sentence to join the ideas. The happiness of the majority outweighs the suffering of one, which is why not helping the child may be justifiable from a utilitarian perspective. We should bear in mind that Le Guin critiques the concept of ultilitarism, not defends it. At the end of the story, we learn that some people walk away from Omelas. “They seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas” (Le Guin 5). Those who walk away from Omelas have silently protested against the attainment of happiness through ones suffering. They also set a moral example to stand up for what is right, and value fundamental human rights. Um-Helat similarly critiques the concept of

Open Document