Moral Philosopher And The Moral Life Analysis

Words: 1057
Pages: 5

The child is never designated as boy or girl. The reader does not know why he/she was chosen to be the “child in the basement,” whether it was given up by its parents as part of the bargain for “the greater good of society” or if it had been kidnapped as a young child. Conceivably, the child was of unsound mind at birth, but that could have also been brought on by its isolation or malnourishment. The child remembers its life in Omelas before the basement and its mothers voice. The child feels as if it’s been punished, desperate to have a normal life. “I will be good”, the child pleas. “Please let me out.” Every citizen older than adolescence is aware of the child, yet no one thinks of releasing him/her. But to label the people of Omelas of “bad” or “evil” does not seem fair; While it is true that they do depend on the misery of a single child, it could be said that modern America does the same. The real issue is that …show more content…
(Is this an article or a book?) Ursula Le Guin gave her story, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”, the subtitle, “Variations on a Theme by William James”, in deference to his declaration. However, David Brooks writes, “In many different venues, the suffering of the few is justified by those trying to deliver the greatest good for the greatest number.” Is it worth it if that happiness has to come as a result of the suffering of a five-year old girl, Ivan, the realistic brother, asks Alyosha, the religious brother, in The Brothers Karamazov. Alyosha replies it would not be, but David Brooks again notes, “we tolerate exploitation, telling each other that their misery is necessary for overall affluence.” This is the quandary posed by “the child in the