IndexDescriptionObjectiveConclusionReferencesMorality and happiness are among the many issues that have troubled philosophers and moral scholars over the years. Most communities around the world value morality and often link it to happiness, explaining why the topics of morality and happiness are a major concern for many not only in philosophy but also in society in general. But why should one or society be moral? This question and its similar variants make us see happiness and morality in different ways, in the individual and social perspective, in the Self and in other perspectives. The interest of this analysis is to observe how the two intertwine and relate in the world of reality. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Goal Description For an overview, happiness can be defined as what an individual acquires after successfully achieving personal values. As Hirsch says, it is a conscious state that has its roots in morality. Ursula LeGuin's story presents a paradoxical dichotomy that challenges the reader's moral standing. It tells of the fictional exotic mythological city of Omelas, a bright city towering above the sea. Unlike other towns or cities, we currently live or know that the people of Omelas are happy individuals. Author Ursula LeGuin describes this city as pure elegance with magnificent public buildings, an ideal government, a city with zero tolerance towards slavery and any form of injustice resulting from the monarchical system of government (LeGuin). The author describes a magnificent city where the lucky inhabitants live a joyful life, enjoying what for many is a utopian type of life with an abundance of comforts that includes no limits on drugs, sexual encounters and good music. The city has an ideal climate that favors the inhabitants of the city, there are no exploitative advertisements, no secret police suggesting the citizens of the city to respect the law and live a free life devoid of any kind of monitoring. Generally, Omelas is the ideal city where anyone could wish to live. As the story progresses, we are introduced to the flaws of the city and its inhabitants. The author notes that although the people of the city live an exotic life, an unlikely life when compared to the real world of events. The joyous and happy life in the city of Omelas depended on the miseries and degradation of a child. Impoverished and locked in a dark cellar, this boy is subjected to the most inhuman conditions only for the millions of people who live in the city. How moral is it that the happiness of the entire city depends on the mistreatment of a single individual? To make things even more complicated, this is just one child, the author notes that since childhood the child has spent his entire life in such devastating conditions. We are not told why fate wanted the boy to suffer for the behavior of the entire city, but considering his age it is clear that the boy did not choose to suffer for the city out of will, but out of submission to the city's inhabitants. Ursula LeGuin notes that children used to cry out for help at night, saying "I'll be good," but at the time the children just whimper and talk less or not at all. Returning to our question, are the citizen's actions justifiable? Do you believe it is acceptable to sacrifice some for the benefit of many others? From the author's description of Omelas it emerges as a perfect example of what is ideal but not real and achievable. My opinion on this matter is that subjecting an individual to inhumane conditions is beneficialof many is not justifiable by any moral standard. If the happiness of a people will be defined by the pain and suffering of others, it is best to let go of happiness all together. Human life is sacred and is not something that other human beings should decide. As such, every human being is entitled to something better in life. Furthermore, the author suggests that the fundamental condition of a good life in the city depends on the boy's relentless suffering. This essentially suggests that suffering and happiness are two sides of the same coin, they cannot exist without the other. This therefore implies that even if the child is set free, there will be people in the city who will suffer and we will also have people who will live happily. Furthermore, the fact of life dictates that there will always be points of suffering and happiness at some point in life. It's not always a smooth line, even for those who are believed to lead happy lives. The story also suggests that to maintain a careful balance aimed at preserving joy in the city, the city's inhabitants had to adopt some sort of system of discrimination. LeGuin observes that in the city "happiness is based on a just discrimination between what is necessary, what is neither necessary nor destructive and what is destructive." This implies that life and happiness in the city have never depended on the boy's alienation and imprisonment. How does the moral/ethical dilemma of 'Omelas' apply to real life? It should be noted that the story The One Who Walk Away from Omelas is purely a mythical dilemma. On the one hand we have the happiness and prosperity linked to an imprisoned and malnourished child, and on the other we have the guilt that consumes a few Homelians over the suffering of children at the expense of their happiness and joyful life. Even though it is a mythical story, it has its implications in the real world we live in. A perfect example is slavery. When it comes to slavery, many people often consider it an outdated concept, one of the images that paints the evil deeds of the 18th and 20th century slave trade. What these people do not notice is that slavery also exists in our contemporary world, but in different forms. In slavery people are subjected by their master to harsh conditions, unpaid labor and many other inhumane conditions that only work best for the masters. Those who profit from slave labor are the masters. So, one way or another, slaves suffer at the expense of their masters. Slavery never ended with its abolition in the 19th century. It has changed shape and still manifests itself in many ways. It also provides examples of slavery for the benefit of the masters such as forced prostitution (especially women), forced labor and children working in sweatshops and many others. It also defines slavery as any form of life in which individuals are controlled by their exploiters. Any form of human exploitation that benefits others should never be tolerated at all. This is regardless of whether it defines the happiness or well-being of most people. Regarding the example of modern slavery, it may be that trapped people have no alternative but to be exploited, the best should be done through legislations to ensure that citizens are not exploited by a few. In relation to our analysis story, observe that in the world of reality a person's life is usually surrounded by suffering and few moments of happiness so it makes no sense to subject others to misery as happened in the city of Omelas for that young boy. The model city of Omelas is imperfect when it comes to perceptions of happiness and morality. Fortunately, there are few in the city)