#Leguin #Literature #Antinatalism This video summarises Ursula K LeGuin's short Story "The ones Who Walk away from Omelas", and analyses its main themes.
@@Leevark You are right in the end and what you said but the fact that it’s one child suffering and I can’t be stopped verse you having to take on the whole world as an individual it be very impossible to do
I started reading the story and got bored, thinking it was a ridiculous unrealistic utopian fairy tale. Then half way into the story it got very dark and sad. What a fascinating short story. Love how it relates to reality of the world.
Thank you so much, you explained every aspect of the story so well. When I was reading the story I knew there weas a deep meaning to it but I couldn't really put my thoughts into words, you did it perfectly woah
The truth is Life in Omelas looks happier only externally. People there are either internally being eaten by the guilt of torturing the child or have reached a state of numbness where their mind will not be able to enjoy the external happiness available in Omelas. Suffering children in the real world is quite a different thing. Most of us don't believe the suffering of anyone else is directly supporting any happiness we have and so we don't have to face a mental agony of the same degree. Many of us also are free to help any suffering children who come in front of us according to our capacity.
I don't think that life in Omelas is necessarily happier than normal life. I think life is happier (and sadder) when there are ups and downs. I feel as if you would have a sense of emptiness without the pain needed to make you grateful. I also believe that she portrayed the society this way because no society can truly be happy without a perspective that shows that they should be happy.
Pain seems to be intrinsically hard-wired into the human condition. There's a whole lot we're not sure about, but the idea that we're bound to suffer is the only unshakable constant.
Thank you🙏 I'm myself a sucker for dystopias in fiction. Ursula K. Le Guin has many novels and short stories that portray interesting dystopias. Margaret Atwood is another writer I go to to scratch that itch. I'm also a manga/ anime fan. Many mangakas play ingeniously with the idea that in the future, the world would spiral into bizzare dystopias.
literally have to write a comparison to this story and 1984 and i wasn’t there to read the story so i saw you just posted this and it’s a very good summary i got the whole story and good points to say in my essay. great video thank you kids in school will find this useful
Oh the juxtaposition of 1984 and The Ones who Walk away from Omelas is interesting! There's the false utopia in Omelas versus the outright dystopia in Airstrip One. There's propitiation and arguably superstition versus scientism. There are lots of glittering contrasts to hammer out. Have a good time digging them out.
Positive utilitarianism Maximizes the utility well being for the greatest possible number Negative utilitarianism decreases pain suffering for the biggest number .
I just realized, THE CHILD from Stephen King's Castle Rock is the same as le guin's child, but King's one is evil, I can't believe i have adored le guin for like forever and I am realizing it now.
😮 I haven't read Stephen King's book. The premise you described is intriguing. I would definitely love to see how he built on The ones who Walk away from Omelas. There's so much to dig into for a good writer. The question of what the child would be like if it ever broke free from its imprisonment. There are elements of Voltaire's Candide that come to mind. There is the exploration of the cosmic equilibrium through which pain and pleasure are distributed between the population of Omelas and the tortured kid. I can definitely see Stephen King do a good job with all of that. I'll undoubtedly be picking up his book, thanks for the rec🙏
Those who walk away represent the rejection of Utilitarianism. The alternative could be something like Deontology or Kantianism where what imports is not maximum utility for the greatest number.
Hi, I have the 2017 Harper Perennial Edition edition. It's over a dozen pages long, but it contains a lot of additional stuff like AfterWord, About the Author, Praise, Also by Ursula K. Le Guin, Back Ads, Copyright and About the Publisher. The story is pretty short. In small font and reduced line spacing, I think it could fit in 4 or 5 pages.
The story doesn't tell us where the ones who leave go because it doesn't want to extol one particular ethical system at the expense of Utilitarianism. The story points the finger at the cracks in Utilitarianism, but it doesn't prescribe an alternative. The reader, or the ones who leave Omelas are free to choose whichever ethical system they feel more comfortable with. The immediate candidates would be Deontology and Kantian Ethics.
I still don't get why they couldn't just torture a criminal instead of a child or something. Maybe the founders of the City made a Faustian deal or something and the demon explicitly said that it had to be a child? Idk
Torturing a criminal would loosen the tension of the ethical conundrum. I love your theory on how that equilibrium works, and how it came to be. The Faustian bargain is definitely the underpinning archetype. It can be explored in various ways. Writing a prequel would be interesting.
If the child has memories of being with its mother in Omelas, it's likely the child isn't the first child in this situation. Omelas probably replaces the child when it eventually dies. Fuck.
Yeah, they both involve Faustian Pacts. The contrast is more pronounced in Omelas though. The Memory Receiver suffers, but not nearly as intensely as The Child in Omelas. And the members of the community live arguably well while the people of Omelas bask in happiness. There are definitely more details disclosed in the Giver. It veers more towards science fiction while I find TWWAFO to be more mystical.
the answer to the question is no and the two questions after that aren't hard to answer, living your life despite the fact that there are more children suffering in it doesn't equal "accepting" a life where children suffer, it means a lack of opportunity, power, and freedom presented to actually fight it, those aren't the same thing. people can live their life while believing the industrial mode of production they're in is still unnacceptable. they simply can't do anything about it because of external systems in power. also I'd argue that Omelas is equally unrealistic after the reveal of the child than it was before the reveal of the child because it (like the utopia) is such a nebulous, magic, and extreme scenario that relies on a deliberate lack of narration + reader imagination, I have no idea who can imagine how a city is sustained purely by a child shitting itself naked in a broom closet. does the kids emotions and feces radiate a powerful energy connected to every factory in the world?
Hi, at the end, we observe that when the inhabitants learn about the little child that incurs all the suffering which counter-balances the reigning bliss in Omelas, a group of people of people accepts the situation and remains in Omelas while another group doesn't accept it, and leaves. Those two groups represent two philosophical theories of morality: 1 Utilitarianism, 2 Deontology. The ones who stay are Utilitarians. They believe that whatever causes happiness, tranquility and well-being for the many, or in other words increases utility, is moral even if it undermines a minority. In Utilitarianism, what matters is the end result, and not how you get to it, and as long as the majority benefits from an action, it is a moral action. The ones who leave Omelas are Deontologists. They are of the view that an action is not to be judged on its consequences. The action itself has to be evaluated and judged whether it is moral or immoral regardless of the effect it produces. Kant's Categorical Imperative is an example of a deontologist moral law whereby an action is assessed independently of its effect.
@@birdworld2748 The author doesn't tell us which theory she supports. But it's clear that those walk away from Omelas are fewer than those who stay in Omelas. Personally, I'm more in line with Kant, and I recognise the importance the Categorical Imperative. I think it would be immoral to accept the suffering of an innocent child for the benefit of the many.
Good review. Though I would have added more images to the video. Only seeing your face during most of the video is a little boring (no offense intended).
I enjoyed a lot of what you said but; It’s not utilitarian. It’s dealing with suicide. She asks if you believe her story of a pleasant world, it’s a fictional place and a fictional child; the whole story gets the reader to admit that they know this world has pain, and it’s not going away. Please stop ruining this story by using it as an example to utilitarianism. There’s so many better and easier ways to discuss this topic. The end of your talk you told us all to commit suicide/ stop reproducing. Might want to give that some thought but I do agree that we shouldn’t needlessly and exclusively bring new souls into a world of suffering. Have you ever asked people with kids why they had them, most answers are so selfish and dark. How many of them did it for the child and not themselves?
We're not in disagreement. I believe there are two levels to the story: one on the surface and another underneath. On the surface, it appears as if the story paints a caricatured and exaggerated image of Utilitarianism, prioritising utility for the majority. A little more spelunking into the narrative, and you get to a darker message, one that is more in line with philosophical pessimism. If a reader feels revolted by how society in Omelas is organised because despite the widespread bounty that everybody enjoys, there is one child who incurs unspeakable horror, and that is unacceptable. If a reader adopts this position, then how would this reader consider bringing a child into this world knowing that: 1/ The birth of the child will not diffuse happiness throughout the world in the same way happiness is diffused in Omelas. 2/ The child will suffer unspeakable pain throughout their existence. Here are some examples of suffering. A) Humans on the one hand understand the concept of freedom, and on the other hand are not free. Freedom is choice. But humans don't choose anything. They don't choose their biological make-ups. They have bodies that need be fed to continue to be alive. They can't choose not to eat, drink or breathe. The human's life expectancy is pre-set. They can't choose to live far beyond it or shorten it, without the horror of experiencing physical pain, and going against the survival instinct. B) Living is a long process of losing stuff. A child will most likely lose their parents, lose their teeth, lose their hair, lose their strength, lose their appeal. Every loss is taxing. C) We have physical bodies that are full of disgusting substances. We can wash all we want, spray perfume, but our bodies are full of disgusting stinky stuff. D) We tend to discard this source of pain because it's something that happens every day. But we do experience hunger and thirst, and these come with pain. The story makes the statement that it doesn't benefit anybody to be brought into life. It's a dark thought that would align with Philipp Mainländer's quote: "The knowledge that life is worthless is the flower of all human wisdom.".
![เจ้าผู้เดียว - ดิด คิตตี้ [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/q0NLCYKBOTo/mqdefault.jpg)
Well done. Thank you for taking the time to post this amazing summary and analysis.
You're very welcome, and thank you.
@@Leevark You are right in the end and what you said but the fact that it’s one child suffering and I can’t be stopped verse you having to take on the whole world as an individual it be very impossible to do
Somehow got recommended this video again and once again, amazed by the level of depth of your analysis.
I started reading the story and got bored, thinking it was a ridiculous unrealistic utopian fairy tale. Then half way into the story it got very dark and sad. What a fascinating short story. Love how it relates to reality of the world.
That twist is brutal.
So beautifully explained. Thank you so much for the explanation and analysis. Much needed!!
❤❤
Thank you so much, you explained every aspect of the story so well. When I was reading the story I knew there weas a deep meaning to it but I couldn't really put my thoughts into words, you did it perfectly woah
You're very welcome. It's a beautifully unsettling story, and it's always a pleasure to discuss it.
Complete Bliss! Beautifully explained 🌼
The truth is Life in Omelas looks happier only externally. People there are either internally being eaten by the guilt of torturing the child or have reached a state of numbness where their mind will not be able to enjoy the external happiness available in Omelas. Suffering children in the real world is quite a different thing. Most of us don't believe the suffering of anyone else is directly supporting any happiness we have and so we don't have to face a mental agony of the same degree. Many of us also are free to help any suffering children who come in front of us according to our capacity.
I don't think that life in Omelas is necessarily happier than normal life. I think life is happier (and sadder) when there are ups and downs. I feel as if you would have a sense of emptiness without the pain needed to make you grateful. I also believe that she portrayed the society this way because no society can truly be happy without a perspective that shows that they should be happy.
I totally agree. That's why Aristotle's concept of Eudaimonia is far more realistic than happiness.
@@Leevark pagan ceremonial life explained by Aristotle
Great analysis, I really enjoyed the short story.
Thanks for this. This is extremely critical and well articulated.
Great summary and analysis! I keep telling my students that there is no utopia without dystopia.
Pain seems to be intrinsically hard-wired into the human condition. There's a whole lot we're not sure about, but the idea that we're bound to suffer is the only unshakable constant.
This is so beautifully explained.
You just made me think of all the situations that is described in the story.
Thank you so much.
💐💐💐
Thank you very much. That's a class thing to say🖤
U saved me . Thank u so much for explaining in depth what the story was really about. Appreciate it
Glad that was useful.
SUCH a good analysis!
Amazingly explained!
Spectacular explanation.
This video was great. Thank you so much
Excellent analysis
Fanatastic, very lovely!
You are a wonder, such a beautiful summarization..
Thank you 🙏
I like this summary your voice is calming too. I think I'll go read the story myself I like dystopian fiction
Thank you🙏 I'm myself a sucker for dystopias in fiction. Ursula K. Le Guin has many novels and short stories that portray interesting dystopias. Margaret Atwood is another writer I go to to scratch that itch. I'm also a manga/ anime fan. Many mangakas play ingeniously with the idea that in the future, the world would spiral into bizzare dystopias.
This is so good
Thank you for this AMEZING explanation
You're very welcome.
literally have to write a comparison to this story and 1984 and i wasn’t there to read the story so i saw you just posted this and it’s a very good summary i got the whole story and good points to say in my essay. great video thank you kids in school will find this useful
Oh the juxtaposition of 1984 and The Ones who Walk away from Omelas is interesting! There's the false utopia in Omelas versus the outright dystopia in Airstrip One. There's propitiation and arguably superstition versus scientism. There are lots of glittering contrasts to hammer out. Have a good time digging them out.
Thank you. Commendable explanation
You're very welcome.
great video
THANK YOU
nice simplified review!
Great!
Really Really Very Helpful 🙌🏻 Very well explained summery And every part of the story!! Thank you so much for this summery💐💐
My pleasure, thank you.
Positive utilitarianism Maximizes the utility well being for the greatest possible number
Negative utilitarianism decreases pain suffering for the biggest number .
I just realized, THE CHILD from Stephen King's Castle Rock is the same as le guin's child, but King's one is evil, I can't believe i have adored le guin for like forever and I am realizing it now.
😮 I haven't read Stephen King's book. The premise you described is intriguing. I would definitely love to see how he built on The ones who Walk away from Omelas. There's so much to dig into for a good writer. The question of what the child would be like if it ever broke free from its imprisonment. There are elements of Voltaire's Candide that come to mind. There is the exploration of the cosmic equilibrium through which pain and pleasure are distributed between the population of Omelas and the tortured kid. I can definitely see Stephen King do a good job with all of that. I'll undoubtedly be picking up his book, thanks for the rec🙏
@@Leevark I am glad I was able to come up with a POV which seemed interesting to you. Thank you.
@@Leevark what's interesting is that he is a grown man, but he is called THE KID and I always found that intriguing but never thought of it this way
@@Leevark ooooh I am so looking forward to this video. Maybe I am wrong but still I am excited
@@fatimahzahra786 Yes, keeping the kid's gender undisclosed is interesting. It saves the story from being confined to a single reading.
I find it interesting that no solutions are given and that some people chose to just walk away. Where to? What happens to them?
Those who walk away represent the rejection of Utilitarianism. The alternative could be something like Deontology or Kantianism where what imports is not maximum utility for the greatest number.
Maybe we don’t know where the persons are going is because we don’t have a solution to make everyone happy yet.
Good thinking
i cant find this story any where and when i found it .it was only 4 pages is it right its only 4??!!
please help!!
Hi, I have the 2017 Harper Perennial Edition edition. It's over a dozen pages long, but it contains a lot of additional stuff like AfterWord, About the Author, Praise, Also by Ursula K. Le Guin, Back Ads, Copyright and About the Publisher. The story is pretty short. In small font and reduced line spacing, I think it could fit in 4 or 5 pages.
THANK U
Great job! But why do we think we are never told where they are going when they leave Omelas?
The story doesn't tell us where the ones who leave go because it doesn't want to extol one particular ethical system at the expense of Utilitarianism. The story points the finger at the cracks in Utilitarianism, but it doesn't prescribe an alternative. The reader, or the ones who leave Omelas are free to choose whichever ethical system they feel more comfortable with. The immediate candidates would be Deontology and Kantian Ethics.
I still don't get why they couldn't just torture a criminal instead of a child or something.
Maybe the founders of the City made a Faustian deal or something and the demon explicitly said that it had to be a child? Idk
Torturing a criminal would loosen the tension of the ethical conundrum.
I love your theory on how that equilibrium works, and how it came to be. The Faustian bargain is definitely the underpinning archetype. It can be explored in various ways. Writing a prequel would be interesting.
If the child has memories of being with its mother in Omelas, it's likely the child isn't the first child in this situation. Omelas probably replaces the child when it eventually dies. Fuck.
A fan-written sequel that captures the selection of a new child would be worth a read!
@@Leevark like the hunger games D:
This story reminds me of The Giver.
Yeah, they both involve Faustian Pacts. The contrast is more pronounced in Omelas though. The Memory Receiver suffers, but not nearly as intensely as The Child in Omelas. And the members of the community live arguably well while the people of Omelas bask in happiness.
There are definitely more details disclosed in the Giver. It veers more towards science fiction while I find TWWAFO to be more mystical.
GOD IS GOOD ❤️🙏🏻 GOD loves you ❤️💕
the answer to the question is no and the two questions after that aren't hard to answer, living your life despite the fact that there are more children suffering in it doesn't equal "accepting" a life where children suffer, it means a lack of opportunity, power, and freedom presented to actually fight it, those aren't the same thing. people can live their life while believing the industrial mode of production they're in is still unnacceptable. they simply can't do anything about it because of external systems in power.
also I'd argue that Omelas is equally unrealistic after the reveal of the child than it was before the reveal of the child because it (like the utopia) is such a nebulous, magic, and extreme scenario that relies on a deliberate lack of narration + reader imagination, I have no idea who can imagine how a city is sustained purely by a child shitting itself naked in a broom closet. does the kids emotions and feces radiate a powerful energy connected to every factory in the world?
Are you a Moroccan?? Also i enjoy this video because i have an essay about it
That's a correct guess!
I am not able to understand the last part of the story!!! What is the message given????🤔🤔
Plzzz answer
Hi, at the end, we observe that when the inhabitants learn about the little child that incurs all the suffering which counter-balances the reigning bliss in Omelas, a group of people of people accepts the situation and remains in Omelas while another group doesn't accept it, and leaves.
Those two groups represent two philosophical theories of morality: 1 Utilitarianism, 2 Deontology.
The ones who stay are Utilitarians. They believe that whatever causes happiness, tranquility and well-being for the many, or in other words increases utility, is moral even if it undermines a minority. In Utilitarianism, what matters is the end result, and not how you get to it, and as long as the majority benefits from an action, it is a moral action.
The ones who leave Omelas are Deontologists. They are of the view that an action is not to be judged on its consequences. The action itself has to be evaluated and judged whether it is moral or immoral regardless of the effect it produces. Kant's Categorical Imperative is an example of a deontologist moral law whereby an action is assessed independently of its effect.
@@Leevark which theory is right according to the author or according to you??
Just curiosity
@@birdworld2748 The author doesn't tell us which theory she supports. But it's clear that those walk away from Omelas are fewer than those who stay in Omelas.
Personally, I'm more in line with Kant, and I recognise the importance the Categorical Imperative. I think it would be immoral to accept the suffering of an innocent child for the benefit of the many.
@@Leevark Thank u🤗
Can you also give summary on magic shop book?🤓and Demian ?
Did you receive my message this time, I can't see it anymore
Hi, yes I received it and responded to it. It's in the comments section.
I, once again, received a notification of a comment of yours. But as soon as I tried to read it, it wasn't there anymore.
I already sent you a message but it was deleted
😮 It seems that I didn't get your message for some reason. Would you mind sharing your thoughts again?
Good review. Though I would have added more images to the video. Only seeing your face during most of the video is a little boring (no offense intended).
That's correct. I have zero drawing talent though. I'd eventually have to figure something out.
I enjoyed a lot of what you said but; It’s not utilitarian. It’s dealing with suicide.
She asks if you believe her story of a pleasant world, it’s a fictional place and a fictional child; the whole story gets the reader to admit that they know this world has pain, and it’s not going away.
Please stop ruining this story by using it as an example to utilitarianism. There’s so many better and easier ways to discuss this topic.
The end of your talk you told us all to commit suicide/ stop reproducing. Might want to give that some thought but I do agree that we shouldn’t needlessly and exclusively bring new souls into a world of suffering. Have you ever asked people with kids why they had them, most answers are so selfish and dark. How many of them did it for the child and not themselves?
We're not in disagreement. I believe there are two levels to the story: one on the surface and another underneath. On the surface, it appears as if the story paints a caricatured and exaggerated image of Utilitarianism, prioritising utility for the majority. A little more spelunking into the narrative, and you get to a darker message, one that is more in line with philosophical pessimism.
If a reader feels revolted by how society in Omelas is organised because despite the widespread bounty that everybody enjoys, there is one child who incurs unspeakable horror, and that is unacceptable. If a reader adopts this position, then how would this reader consider bringing a child into this world knowing that:
1/ The birth of the child will not diffuse happiness throughout the world in the same way happiness is diffused in Omelas.
2/ The child will suffer unspeakable pain throughout their existence. Here are some examples of suffering.
A) Humans on the one hand understand the concept of freedom, and on the other hand are not free. Freedom is choice. But humans don't choose anything. They don't choose their biological make-ups. They have bodies that need be fed to continue to be alive. They can't choose not to eat, drink or breathe. The human's life expectancy is pre-set. They can't choose to live far beyond it or shorten it, without the horror of experiencing physical pain, and going against the survival instinct.
B) Living is a long process of losing stuff. A child will most likely lose their parents, lose their teeth, lose their hair, lose their strength, lose their appeal. Every loss is taxing.
C) We have physical bodies that are full of disgusting substances. We can wash all we want, spray perfume, but our bodies are full of disgusting stinky stuff.
D) We tend to discard this source of pain because it's something that happens every day. But we do experience hunger and thirst, and these come with pain.
The story makes the statement that it doesn't benefit anybody to be brought into life. It's a dark thought that would align with Philipp Mainländer's quote: "The knowledge that life is worthless is the flower of all human wisdom.".
Utilitarianism the greatest good for the great number
FREE PALESTINE