Department of English and American Studies

Philosophical Faculty
Palack University in Olomouc

Adam Szturc F160147

English for Translators and Interpreters

Sensible, Logical, Responsible, Practical: The

Contrast between Utilitarianism and
Egalitarianism in Ursula Kroeber Le Guin's The
Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas

Mgr. Marian Siedloczek

KAA/AJC1 Freshman Composition
4th February 2017
 The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas 1 do not only walk away from
Omelas; they walk away from the cold ethics of numbers it is built upon, they
walk away for their belief that equality and freedom of each individual are of
more value than the total volume of happiness. They walk away from the
mathematics of utilitarianism, a theory that the aim of action should be the
largest possible balance of pleasure over pain or the greatest happiness of the
greatest number,2 driven by their egalitarian view of the worldbelieving that
all people are equally important and should have the same rights and opportunities
in life.3
Ursula Kroeber Le Guins story describes a utopian city of Omelas, whose
citizens happiness is based on a just discrimination of what is necessary, what is
neither necessary nor destructive, and what is destructive.4 However, later on, the
reader finds that it is not only just discrimination of goods that allows this people
to thrive but that it is also a discrimination of an innocent child on which this
dreamy society stands. It is every citizens decision, as well as readers, what
stance they will take in front of this terrible paradox. 5 This essay focuses on
revealing how the moral dilemma presented in Le Guins The Ones Who Walk
Away From Omelas is ultimately a choice between the two ethical theories of
utilitarianism and egalitarianism.
Their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their
friendships... ...depend wholly on this childs abominable misery. 6 The seeming
utopia of Omelas is based on a tradehappiness of many for a suffering of one.
Their happiness is real, and perhaps pure and innocent, for they do not take
delight in the childs suffering. It is simply a trade where one loses and many win,
and they happen to be the ones who win. Those who stay in Omelas understand

1 Ursula Kroeber Le Guin, The Unreal and the Real (Easthampton, MA: Small Beer
Press, 2012).
2 Merriam-Webster.com utilitarianism, accessed February 4, 2017,
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/utilitarianism
3 Cambridge online dictionary egalitarian, accessed February 4, 2017,
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/egalitarian
4 Le Guin, The Unreal and the Real, 7.
5 Le Guin, The Unreal and the Real, 9.
6 Le Guin, The Unreal and the Real, 8.

1
and accept this. They are not sociopathic or insensitive: "Often the young people
go home in tears, or in a tearless rage when they have seen the child and faced this
terrible paradox. They may brood over it for weeks or years." 7 Nevertheless, they
accept the maths in the endsacrificing the opportunities, rights, indeed the life
of one child, in exchange for that one thing everyone strives forhappiness
happiness not for one child, but for everyone; and that is too good of a deal.
Their tears at the bitter injustice dry when they begin to perceive the terrible
justice of reality, and to accept it,8 through the prism of utilitarianism.
But there are those who do not accept this. They leave Omelas, they walk
ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back.9 For these, the utilitarian
viewthat many should thrive on the suffering of few, even if in the end the
balance of pleasure over pain is the largestis simply wrong. They cannot accept
to be benefitted at the expense of the child. Although they see clearly that the
numbers are right, they still cannot accept the deal they happen to be a part of. For
what other reason, but for they believe and put value in the rights and equality of
each individual. Were they asked, they would subscribe to the moral philosophy of
egalitarianism; this child ought not to suffer, no matter how much happiness or
anything else of value it brings, for it is important above all that each human has
the same rights and opportunities.
Of course, they do not bring this philosophy to full practice; either due to
practical reasons (their efforts would fail in the other-minded society of Omelas)
or because by rescuing the child they would surely hurt their fellow-citizens more
than they are willing to do. Or perhaps because the child is in such a devastated
state that even if the child could be released, it would not get much good of its
freedom.10 Either way, their values, and moral philosophy do not allow them to
accept living in the utilitarian society of Omelas.
Le Guin's dilemma of Omelas is, at its core, a dilemma of values and
prioritiesthe society and its thriving are built on utilitarianism, permitting
suffering of few (namely one) that allows for greater total happiness. The
philosophy that opposes this, egalitarianism, believing that equal rights and
7 Le Guin, The Unreal and the Real, 9.
8 Le Guin, The Unreal and the Real, 9.
9 Le Guin, The Unreal and the Real, 9.
10 Le Guin, The Unreal and the Real, 9.

2
opportunities are of a higher value than total happiness, drives the occasional
individuals out of the city. These individuals would surely agree with James
Williams Moral Philosopher that:
If the hypothesis were offered us of a world in which . . . millions
[were] kept permanently happy on the one simple condition that a certain
lost soul on the faroff edge of things should lead a life of lonely torture,
what except a specifical and independent sort of emotion can it be which
would make us immediately feel, even though an impulse arose within us
to clutch at the happiness so offered, how hideous a thing would be its
enjoyment when deliberately accepted as the fruit of such a bargain?11
Le Guin stated that she took inspiration from Williams.12 Perhaps she wanted to do
just thatput into contrast a bargain that would maximize happiness
utilitarianismand human innate empathy and sense for justice and equality
egalitarianism.

11 William James, The Moral Philosopher and the Moral Life, in International Journal
of Ethics, Vol. 1, No. 3 (The University of Chicago Press, April 1891): 333.
12 Le Guin, The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, in The Winds Twelve Quarters
(New York: Harper and Row, 1975).

3
Bibliography
Le Guin, Ursula Kroeber. "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas." In The
Winds Twelve Quarters. New York: Harper and Row, 1975.
"The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas." In The Unreal and the Real, 69.
Easthampton, MA: Small Beer Press. 2012.
James, William. "The Moral Philosopher and the Moral Life." International
Journal of Ethics, Vol. 1, No. 3 (The University of Chicago Press, April
1891): 330354.