'The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas' and Ethics

"The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" reflects an ethical dystopian scenario: in exchange for a glorious society filled to the brim with revelation, happiness, party, and good-spirited nature, a small child is malnourished, mistreated, abused, and psychologically deteriorated to make him sub-human. The rest of the community is aware of this child's suffering, and because of this, has the ability to leave this 'utopia' at any time they wish, and in turn, will leave the paradise behind for a world of lesser value.

So, how ethical is this story exactly?

I'm not expert on philosophy, but I'll approach this topic from two different formats: one, from a Kantian perspective of ethical understanding, and second, from a utilitarian perspective, and analyze the differences between the theories.

According to Kant, this is simply inhuman. Kantian theory relies on a set of values and barebone essentials that we as humans, no matter the circumstance, must understand as well as perform within the confines of our grasp. To Kant, there's a required sense of motherhood to the care of a child, where no matter the cost or external output, every child deserves a supposed 'motherly touch.' Hence, Kant would not only walk away from Omelas, but in the same way, try to destroy it. It preserves the concept of false happiness provided through another's suffering, mirroring the concept of 'one must die for a million to survive.' Within the confines of Kantian theory, this child is being denied the basic of human essentials, rotting in its own filth, without the care of a single human being, and because of this, the conscious of the entire city is put to shame, put to disgust, and thus, the action of torturing the child for preservation becomes gruesome and beyond unethical.

The utilitarians have a separate perspective on the theory of suffering. Utilitarianism is the idea that whatever maximizes pleasure must be the most ethical, objective action. In this case, it is only 1 child put to suffering, and the child will not perish, but rather be taken care of in the most minimal fashion by the surrounding community. As a result, the rest of Omelas gets to live a life of prosper and happiness, and only bears the weight of guilt upon the suffering of the child if they choose to. If one chooses to ignore his inner conscious and allow the happiness of the surrounding community to make life worth living, and they understand the consequences of taking care of the child, they not only serve no harm, but the suffering of the child is the best thing for the community. In exchange for one small bit of hurt, the many others, with the option to leave whenever they wish, maximizes the level of output pleasure, and the action, to them, becomes morally obligated.

Personally, I value the Kantian perspective. To an extent, the ability to leave whenever one wishes gratifies a personal opinion on the value of suffering. But the care of a child rests on maternal gratitude and personal understanding of the morals of a mother's care, and the perspective of childhood being a time of understanding the external and creating a grasp of the surrounding atmosphere. When a child is taken away from said experience, they are reduced to less than human, understanding the basics of nature from an animalistic perspective. Thus, the complexity of understanding is taken away, and it is no better than abusing an animal who doesn't know any better for the sake of self-gratification, and at its barren core, has no moral obligation.

To thus, I see the Omelas people as, from an ethical perspective, cruel, inhumane, and unimaginably barbaric.

The Definition of 'Utopia'

Before we can understand the concept of a 'Dystopia,' the concept of a 'Utopia' must first be idealized. Utopia is a 'perfect' world, a place where there is perfection in every sense and uniformity unmatched by surrounding forces and atmospheres. A perfect setting for such a place would depict uniformity across its board, where there is no plot hole, no pitfall, no small piece of contradictory evidence to be found. Thus, everyone's form of utopia is different, with each one being different according to the thoughts, theories, and opinions formulated within the mind of an individual. For this blog, here is my depiction of a Utopia:


The location of said utopia would be an island in a vast ocean, shaped like a star with 5 major points and harbors within the sea. As such, there would by 5 bays, each one watched by a guard tower on both sides of the points of the star. Thus, there can be imports and exports, but there cannot be any sort of fugitive or illegal crossing into the territory. The edges of the star are more flat, and the center is more mountainous, full of snowcaps and higher planes. Thus, there are farms on the outsides of the mountains, cities with factories and industries on the edges of the star, and trade routes and paths throughout the mountain range.

Trade typically takes 1-2 months by foot to have interaction between cities. However, thanks to modern communication and airline travel, airborne travel can be done within a few hours, with oil mines in the mountain range being harvested by each city. Each city carries an equal distribution of central power, with a mayor of each city and a group of citizens who keep regulation and judiciary power, both of which are voted on by the common public. There are no political parties; each one follows a socialistic-ideology of free power and taxation, with low, but not zero, rates on power and consumption, and common perception and delegation on laws, custom, and city issues.

Every citizen has a job that supports the outcome of the community. Education is public for all citizens through high school, and colleges provide outlet majors for all walks of curriculum, from teaching business to law firms to medicine to education and such. As well, if one wishes to skip college, they are offered easier, but lower paying, blue-collar jobs to maintain the sense of power and energy across the star. There is no property tax, but there is income tax, higher for those with higher education, but not at the same differential rates. Everyone pays taxes, and there is no unemployment, because there are always job opportunities even at the lowest blue-collar level.

In terms of citizen rights, there is no marriage. However, legal couples can be separated by age at a maximum of 5 years, with the youngest partner being 17 years of age or older, in order to prevent criminal offenses such as pedophilia or adultery. If a couple wants to spend their lives together, it is perfectly accepted by the state. But there is no binding by marriage, because the rights of people to spend time together should be dictated by them, not by a code that warrants lawyers, money, and custody rights. However, if the couple is to bear a child, it is especially frowned upon by the community for them to split apart, and one parent is decided by grand jury over custody of the child. However, since there is no legal splitting of marriage, if the couple is happy and wishes to bear a child, then society is all for it. As well, same-sex couples are completely legal and supported within the communities.

Religion is an open book. There are temples, holy precincts, but a singular religion is not defined. There are laws regarding the legality of certain religious actions, and there are restrictions on how far actions can be taken in promotion of singular religious ideology. However, the right to free speech under the laws of each individual city are protected, so anyone may practice the religious undertones they feel necessary. Thus, the openness of philosophical thought over the existence of a higher being may be practiced, and religious undertone serves no purpose within the politics and expressions of government action.

When a person dies, the family, extended and domestic, talks to the local government over the rights of the funeral. Usually, it is taken care of by a religious specialist, and said specialist will perform a ritual based on the religious aspects of the family who lost the loved one. If that person has no family, a generic ritual by the specialist will be taken care of depending on the practiced religion, athiest to Islam to Christian. Death is seen to be celebrated, but it is taken care of with a procession and a service, followed by a reception, and is not a lavish time, but rather a time of reflection and personal wonder.


As of now, this is the sort of utopia I see when I think of the terminology. I will not base all of my views of a utopia on the past 6 paragraphs, but many of my ideas of the concept of a perfect society is embodied within them, and thus, I wait to see the visions of many other authors in the view of what the opposite of this society seems to be.