Essay --

In the short story The Ones Who Walk Away from the Omelas, Ursula Le Guin illustrates a community that is joyous. However, the community is torn because the source of their enjoyment is repayable to the choosing of an unfortunate chela that resides in a basement under of the fine-looking public buildings of Omelas neglected and only ever eating. Le Guin explanation that although the quite a teensy of the community are very happy, they are also very good aware of what is providing them that happiness. He writes, tout ensemble sock the tyke is there They all know that it has to be there. Some of them understand why, and some do non, but they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill of their makers, eve the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weathers of their skies, depend wholly on this childs abominable misery (257). This unjust and cruel punishment this child essential endure for the sake of the community causes an ethical dilemma that tears apart the community. The ethical dilemma forces the community to acknowledge their living spatial relation and ask themselves What is more important? Their happiness or this child? Thus, they must make a choice to either walk aside from the sustenance and community they have bouncyd in for their whole life because their source of happiness is at the cost of a young boys life. Or, do they continue to live in Omelas and ignore the harsh conditions that this young boy is exposed to. In the story the boy is described as a six-year-old boy that is neglected, locked away in a dirty room, abused mentally and physically, and alone(Le Guin, 257). He barely has any fat on him because all he is fed is hal... ...e law, it does not mean that it is right and that we should be so ignorant to reason. In this situation, I would not be able to live with myself knowing that this one little boy is not being fed, being kicked, and left alone to basically die for my happiness. That is completely unacceptable. I believe that while it is innate for us to settle for comfort, we should not live a life that needs abuses somebody to accomplish something. According to the categorical imperative, one should abide what they ought to do because it manifests from the virtuous law. Thus, I would walk away from Omelas because all people are represent and I would not be able to view this boy as a means to my end, which is happiness. Also, if that is the only way for me to achieve happiness because it is not true happiness but superficial emotion that muckle easily be demolished if anything happens to the boy.