# data[].attributes.body
In this unit, I have learned what it means for something to be “better” from the citizens of Omelas who must decide what to do when they learn about the child, from Truman who is faced with the decision to stay or leave Seahaven, and from Oedipus who must save Thebes when he learns the truth about his life. I have learned how knowledge doesn’t change what is “better” but can affect the decisions and livelihood of those who gain it. Finally, I learned that we have a responsibility to society to use our knowledge to perform actions that we understand to be moral, so that humanity can function without unrestrained evil.

Firstly, from “The ones who walk away from Omelas”, I gained new perspectives on what makes actions “better”, and what makes decisions moral. In the perspective of the people living in Omelas who experience extreme happiness at the expense of a tortured child, they are living in a near-perfect city. The total happiness of the city far outweighs the pain of one child. If anyone in the city were to do something different, such as free the child, leave the city, or escape from the cell (in the case of the child) the net happiness of the city would decrease, making any of those actions immoral. Another perspective I have considered is of those who would attempt to free the child. To them, every human has fundamental rights, and there are fundamental rules of morality which should be followed regardless of any negative consequences they may have. Additionally, every human should be considered as ends in themselves, and not means in other people's lives, like the child in Omelas or Truman in The Truman Show, who are used as tools for others’ benefit. Although this moral code does not always maximize happiness, actions are clearly right or wrong, and when universally applied, can create a functioning society.

In each of these cases, knowledge does not change what is right and wrong, but can still affect the decisions and livelihoods of those who receive it. In the first case, where the morality of an action is determined by the total benefit it creates for all people, there is a spectrum of morality for every situation in which an action can be performed. In this case, more knowledge is always better, as possible moral and immoral decisions already exist for every scenario, and more knowledge simply provides a better understanding of more of these choices, allowing for a better choice to be made. An example of this occurs in Oedipus Rex. Oedipus is unknowingly cursing Thebes by ruling it. The moral decision for him to make would be to stop ruling, but he is unaware of this until he learns the truth about his family. Although the truth may hurt Oedipus as an individual and force him to make a tough decision, it helps him increase the total happiness of Thebes by uncovering choices that were previously hidden to him. In the second case, right and wrong actions already exist as well, but there is no spectrum, and they are clearly right or wrong because they follow moral guidelines. Knowledge, then, does not affect what decision one should make, and therefore knowing more is sometimes better and sometimes worse, only depending on whether the information hurts the receiver or not.

Lastly, regardless of how one determines actions to be good or evil, I believe that they have a responsibility to society to act in ways that they understand to be good. In order for society to function, most people must be able to be taught some form of morals and act in ways they deem to be good.

In conclusion, if you believe that actions should be judged by their consequences, knowing more is always better, as it allows for more informed decisions which result in better consequences. If you believe that actions that conform to a set of moral laws are good, and other actions are evil, then knowing more is better when the knowledge makes the individual happier, and is worse otherwise. Regardless of which theory you believe in, you are responsible for acting on those understandings and attempting to make moral decisions for the good of society.

# data[].attributes.headline
Summative, The ones who walk away from Omelas, Children who have just learned about the child, Dialogue.

# data[].attributes.subject
Summative, The ones who walk away from Omelas, Children who have just learned about the child, Dialogue.

# data[].attributes.body
Victor: It is horrendous what we are doing to this child. He is tortured in his prison, without hope of escape while we experience no suffering, and benefit from him. I intend to leave this wretched city.

Eugene: What good does leaving do, Victor. You are not improving anyone’s lives, including your own.

Victor: Then maybe I can regain some honor by setting the child free, so nobody else can feed on his happiness.

Alex: I am indifferent on staying or leaving as neither would affect the happiness of the rest of the city, but setting the child free would cause more suffering. It would turn Omelas into a regular city with social classes and suffering. In every other city, it is very rare for people to be truly happy like they are in Omelas, and there are many poor people who experience plenty of suffering. If we were to free him, everyone would be worse off other than the child, but a little bit of happiness for him is not worth the suffering of an entire city. I commend the child on his noble sacrifice.

Ethan: The child should be doing everything in its power to escape, as it should not be obligated to sacrifice its livelihood for the “greater good.” I agree that freeing him would be a terrible decision, but only because it would cause me suffering. With my life being the only thing I truly own in this world, is it immoral to act in my self-interest? Why should I be obligated to help others and hurt myself in the process? I intend to stay in Omelas, where I am happy. Additionally, acting in my own self-interest does help others. I am kind to people so that they will be kind to me in the future. A society where people are selfish would prosper, because it would still be in people's best interest to cooperate, and people are more capable of helping themselves than others, because they don’t entirely know what makes others happy.

Eugene: It is fallacious to say that moral actions are those that provide the most benefit to the one who performs them, yet say the reason they are moral is because it will benefit everyone. If a moral action is one that causes the most happiness to everyone, it does not make sense to sacrifice others happiness for your own self-interest. I intend to stay in Omelas, as doing anything else would cause more suffering than happiness. There are easily enough people in Omelas where their happiness outweighs the child's pain. What we should instead be doing is inviting more people to come join us and live in this wonderful city.

David: I agree with Victor and Alex; the child should be set free. No matter how much happiness he is causing, every human being has intrinsic value should never be used to achieve something else. People should instead be treated as ends in themselves. I believe that there are acts which are evil and should never be performed, regardless of any positive consequences, because they could not be universally considered good actions. In our case, I do not think the notion that it is ok to torture people for one's own happiness can or should be applied universally. It is not good enough to leave Omelas; the child should be freed. Oh how I wish the child was not revealed to us, then none of this would be an issue.

Eugene: But David, having more knowledge always allows us to better understand the consequences of our actions and thus allows us to make more moral decisions, even if it hurts us as individuals.

David: Knowledge can hurt people, or cause them to hurt themselves making decisions that they wouldn’t have to otherwise. Why should the consequences of one's actions judge whether they are ethical or not? Is it a good deed to attempt murder if by mistake I cause some happiness?

Eugene: Any action that makes people happier is good, regardless of intent. This means people must strive to gain knowledge so that they may perform actions that are closest to perfect. When people believe that all they have to do is make an attempt to do good, they won’t work to perform actions that benefit humanity the most. Also, David, if you believe there are evil actions that should never be done, what should someone do when confronted with a choice between two evils? Would it not be ok to lie to save a friends life? Or to steal to pay for a family member's medical treatment?

David: Since these acts cannot be applied universally, I don’t believe they are moral. If it was ok for everyone to lie and steal if it would benefit themselves, what would be the value of promises or truth? I believe that there are moral guidelines that people must follow, intent is not good enough.

Ethan: I agree with Eugene that more knowledge is always better, as it allows me to make more informed decisions about what will benefit me the most.

Alex: I agree with Eugene because without knowledge, I could be performing actions that hurt others, even if I am trying to be good. It is important to try and gain as much information as possible so that I may benefit the most people.

Victor: I don’t believe that more knowledge is always better because I believe that intent is important when deciding whether someone did right or wrong. In our case, knowledge is challenging our character, making the right decision a tough one to make. But in many other cases, knowledge can help people make decisions.

Eugene: I suppose knowledge can hurt people if they don’t believe that the consequences of their actions determine whether they are right or wrong. If however, you believe that consequences are important, knowledge is just a revelation of what already exists. It exists whether you are aware of it or not, and thus knowing more shouldn’t hurt you, it simply helps by allowing for a more informed decision making.

# data[].attributes.headline
Formative, Truman Show, Christof, during the interview, interview

# data[].attributes.subject
Formative, Truman Show, Christof, during the interview, interview