# data[].attributes.body
Read or view one or more of the posted items, making notes in your writing notebooks of anything thought-provoking, interesting, connected to texts we've read, etc. Then, make a post beneath that item in which you post 3 quotes that you found particularly discussion-worthy. For EACH quote:
a. Text to Self- Describe your personal connection or reaction.
2. Text to Text- Explain how the quote connects to Le Guin's & Jemisin's stories about Omelas & Um-Helat, Utilitarian thinking, the Allegory of the Cave, and/or Machiavelli, as well as other items posted in the Padlet (if applicable).
3. Text to World- Analyze real-world connections & implications of that quote and its connections to the stories, Utilitarian thinking, the Allegory of the Cave, & Machiavelli's "The Prince," if applicable.

# data[].attributes.body
Formal and informal replies:

Formally reply to AT LEAST 3 of the original posts beneath any of the items.  Your FORMAL replies must be written in the following format:

a.  Personal Connection (Why are you replying to this person's post?  What interested you? Did you agree or disagree with something?)

b.  Discussion (Ask questions or discuss what this person wrote in their response.)

c.  Extension (Add something to this person's ideas.  Bring something up they didn't mention.  Provide a link to a website or video related to something they said.)

Once you complete your formal replies, continue responding to others by replying to other formal replies.

Title each of your posts with Your Name/Reply #__ e.g. 1, 2, 3 to __________ person's name)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get access to files anywhere through secure cloud storage and file backup for your photos, videos, files and more with Google Drive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
So I've recently discovered a new favorite author, three-time Hugo Award winner and all-around badass N. K. Jemisin. I finished reading The Fifth Season and immediately had to learn more about Jemisin and her other works. Of course books 2 and 3 of the Broken Earth trilogy have gone to the top of my TBR, along with her Inheritance...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Ones Who Walk Away and the Ones Who Stay and Fight: Social Justice in Science Fiction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
So I've recently discovered a new favorite author, three-time Hugo Award winner and all-around badass N. K. Jemisin. I finished reading The Fifth Season and immediately had to learn more about Jemisin and her other works. Of course books 2 and 3 of the Broken Earth trilogy have gone to the top of my TBR, along with her Inheritance...

# data[].attributes.headline
35 minute lecture by A Critical Dragon (Professor Trip) on YouTube

# data[].attributes.subject
35 minute lecture by A Critical Dragon (Professor Trip) on YouTube

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Le Guin's 'Omelas' & Jemisin's 'The One's Who Stay and Fight' - Structural Abstraction vs. Context

# data[].attributes.headline
There are often multiple responses to the questions below, and there is also overlap among the questions. You should explore these varying interpretations and meanings as well as where they complement or contradict Le Guin's and/or Jemisin's story.

# data[].attributes.subject
There are often multiple responses to the questions below, and there is also overlap among the questions. You should explore these varying interpretations and meanings as well as where they complement or contradict Le Guin's and/or Jemisin's story.

# data[].attributes.body
1. What values are emphasized in the text's society (or societies)?
2. How is happiness defined in the society?
3. What is the status of progress (science/technology) within the society?
4. Is ignorance or knowledge valued more? Is knowledge seen as dangerous or subversive?
5. How is stability defined? What is sacrificed in order to achieve it?
6. How is freedom treated?
7. What is the status of privacy?
8. Is individuality (unique/unrestrained expression) allowed, or is it controlled/surveilled/prohibited?
9. How are gender roles treated (if at all) in the work?
10. How is family portrayed in the text?
11. How much emphasis is placed on community or solidarity? Are true intimacy and communication allowed or encouraged (or do we only see superficial bonds form among characters)?
12. What is the status of religion? Does it exist and, if so, in what form? Who/what is "worshiped"?
13. What is the class/caste system in the society? Is the society organized hierarchically?
14. How do propaganda, rhetoric, and slogans function in this society?
15. What is the status of literacy (the written word, books, etc.)?
16. What roles do history and the past play in the text?
17. Are nostalgia and sentimentality present in the text? If so, how do they function?
18. Are there any drugs or other mechanisms by which members of the society are encouraged or simply able to escape/distract from reality?
19. Is there a contrast between civilized (cultured or acculturated) and uncivilized (uncultured or not acculturated) peoples and places?
20. Have the people in the society somehow moved beyond the human (or what we traditionally consider to be "human")? If so, in what way? What are the consequences?
21. Which characters (if any) rebel against the society? Why? What are the consequences of this rebellion? What do these consequences tell us about the message/argument of the text?
22. Are there characters who are other (they don't belong/fit in)?
23. Is there a catalyzing event(s) that brings about rebellion or conflict in the society? If so, what is it?
24. Is there a fatal flaw(s) of the society (something that will be its downfall, or eventually destroy it)? If so, what is it?
25. Can the society go on forever? Or is there hope? Possibility of change? Where can this hope be found?
26. What aspects of the society resonate with aspects of our own (contemporary) society? What aspects contradict our society?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the things I love most about fiction is the way stories talk to each other. I don't mean when one story is told in response to another, although I love that too, from the most intense scholarly research down to the silliest fanfic and memes. I'm talking about the internal conversation that happens inside our minds, when we experience one story in a way that makes us think about another, encourages us to reconsider our previous experiences, and reveals interpretations and possibilities we hadn't thought of before.

Best of all is when that connection takes us by surprise. When two stories that don't necessarily have any natural connection to each other show up in the shady dive bar of the mind, eye each other warily across the darkened room, and there's a spark of recognition, a mutual eyebrow raise of, "Huh, I didn't know you hung out here."

Consider Ursula K. Le Guin's story "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas." Since its publication in 1973, this story has become part of the literary ecosystem, especially (but certainly not exclusively) in SFF. It's an odd little piece of philosophical fiction, not even 3,000 words long, that sets up a thorny moral and ethical problem without offering any easy answers. Literature and philosophy students have argued about it for decades, and there are several works of art that reference it directly, ranging from direct responses such as N.K. Jemisin's "The Ones Who Stay and Fight" to interpretative allusions such as the BTS video "Spring Day."

Here's a quick refresher: The story describes a summer festival in Omelas, a city full of beauty and joy, unburdened by suffering and sadness. But somewhere in that city, in a windowless broom closet in a damp cellar, a single, malnourished child is locked away in the darkness, never to be released or treated with kindness. The child's existence is not a secret. Every adolescent in the city is shown the child and told about the terrible bargain that underlies their society: "...their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill of their makers, even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weathers of their skies, depend wholly on this child's abominable misery."

It's not until the very last paragraph that we meet the people of the title, the ones who choose to leave the city entirely rather than live in such a system. The story refuses to allow the possibility of changing the system-a deliberately rigid binary that frustrates readers to no end, because the questions it raises cannot be brushes away by the narrator's assurance that this is how it has to be. Do people really have to suffer for a society to function? Who makes that decision? Why can't the rules be changed? How complicit are those who stay? What good does leaving do? Why can't we fight? What happens if we give the kid in the closet swords for hands?

Right. About that.

Let's switch gears for a moment, to a piece of fiction that is, as far as I know, completely unrelated to Le Guin's story.

The 2019 anime Dororo is based on a manga by legendary mangaka Osamu Tezuka that was first published in 1967-1968. It takes place in a fantastical, monster-filled version of Japan's Sengoku era and tells the story of the young orphaned thief named Dororo who befriends the mysterious ronin Hyakkimaru. When they first meet, Hyakkimaru is completely hidden behind a mask, cloak, prosthetics that conceal swords, and swaths of bandages. All of this is to hide the fact that he has no eyes, no ears, no mouth, no organs, and only one limb, but is still a terrifyingly effective warrior with superhuman strength and speed. (Because magic, yo.) He doesn't even have any skin -not until (in the first episode) he kills a demon that's causing trouble, after which he grows skin.

Dororo, who is extremely clever but also has very few options for surviving in a world that is relentlessly cruel to orphaned children, takes one look at this terrifying swords-for-hands teenage warrior and thinks, "I like him. He's going to be my best friend."

Which is, yes, completely adorable, as well as the root of the whole mesmerizing tale that follows. The anime is beautiful, the characters are complex and fascinating, the story is brutal and sad and funny and heart-wrenching in all the right ways, and all of it has so much going on that I still think about all the different layers months after I first watched it.

One of the layers I am still thinking about is how Dororo is addressing the same thorny moral quandaries raised in Le Guin's Omelas story: the questions of who is expected to suffer for the success of a society, what that suffering does to both individuals and communities, and what happens when somebody decides to break that social contract rather than submit to it.

We learn right from the start what's going on with Hyakkimaru: he's the firstborn son of a warlord named Daigo, who offered up a sacrifice to demons in exchange for power and prosperity. The trouble is, Daigo kinda sorta forgot to specify exactly what he was willing to sacrifice, so the demons took his newborn son's limbs, face, senses, and organs-but not his life. When Daigo gets a look at his infant son, instead of being horrified by the price of his demonic deal, he basically says, "Ugh, gross, get rid of it, we'll have a better son next time."

So the baby is set adrift in a river and rescued by a man named Jukai, who gives him prosthetics, teaches him to fight and survive, raises him, loves him. They discover that if Hyakkimaru kills one of the demons who took his body parts, he gets that body part back. Thus Hyakkimaru sets out on a quest to kill monsters and take back what was stolen from him.

What Hyakkimaru doesn't know is why the demons took his body parts or what happens when he kills those demons. He doesn't know why his life is the way it is. He doesn't know who is responsible. Through a series of tragedies and the world's most unpleasant family reunion, Hyakkimaru learns-and we learn right along with him-that killing the demons breaks the bargain they made with Daigo. And that means removing the protection that bargain provided. For the last sixteen or so years, Daigo's lands have been spared much of the war and disaster that surrounds them, but once Hyakkimaru starts killing the demons that changes. Landslides and drought beset the villages; neighboring warlords gather armies to attack; the period of relative peace and prosperity comes to an abrupt and violent end.

Thus every character in the know faces the same question all the people of Omelas face: what do you do when you find out peace and prosperity are built on intense suffering?

Daigo answered that question for himself years ago, when he decided that he was happy to sacrifice his infant son; Hyakkimaru's mother resigned herself to it, not happily, but not fighting against it either. Hyakkimaru's brother-the one who was born to replace the child Daigo tossed out like so much trash-is absolutely horrified when he learns what his father did, but eventually comes to believe that the bargain must be maintained to protect their people.

But not everybody comes to the same conclusion. It's worth noting, as well, that life under demonic protection is far from perfect; the demons' ideas of protecting a place tend to mean restricting themselves to a smaller number of victims, but that number is not zero. Nor has everybody benefited from Daigo's bargain, as it affects only one region in a time period that is literally defined by widespread war. Upon seeing the destruction caused by defeating the demons, Dororo does ask if they are doing the right thing-because Dororo is a war orphan who knows suffering intimately, and because the demon-killing quest is obviously having a terrible effect on Hyakkimaru himself. Likewise, Jukai questions Hyakkimaru's actions not because he thinks the bargain should be preserved, but because he's afraid that the boy he loves as a son is letting violence and anger eat him from the inside.

The one person who doesn't entertain the question is Hyakkimaru himself.

Hyakkimaru's quest is not a pleasant one to be on. In fact it is often horrific for him. He doesn't feel pain until he gets his central nervous system back, after which he feels pain all the time. He suffers debilitating sensory overstimulation when he gets his ears back and can hear the world for the first time. He learns the hard way that flesh-and-blood limbs are a lot harder to replace than prosthetics when a demon bites them off. As soon as it becomes apparent what he is doing, his family-who he never had a chance to know-immediately pull out all the stops to try to kill him.

But none of that matters. Hyakkimaru doesn't have to ask what he should do. He has never enjoyed the supposed peace and prosperity the demonic bargain provides, but he has very much endured the suffering that paid for it. To him there is no real choice at all.

I love this. I love the way it gives such strong voice to a character who doesn't say much of anything in words, and not just because of the narrative commitment to bodily autonomy-there is no question that Daigo bargained away something that was never his to offer-but because of how Hyakkimaru's perspective reveals how utterly empty the question is in the first place.

In Le Guin's story, the world of Omelas is carefully constructed-via a narrator who knows we won't believe this construction-to strip away all choices but two: stay and change nothing, or leave and change nothing. That it's a false choice is obvious immediately, particularly when the narrator tells us about the justifications used to maintain the status quo. The people of Omelas, you see, convince themselves that this one cruelty is not only necessary, but is in fact the reason they can be such good and happy people. Misery and suffering are ennobling-so long as it's not their misery and suffering, but somebody else's. Not only that, but they convince themselves that there's no point in freeing the child:

But as time goes on they begin to realize that even if the child could be released, it would not get much good of its freedom: a little vague pleasure of warmth and food, no doubt, but little more. It is too degraded and imbecile to know any real joy. It has been afraid too long ever to be free of fear.

While the choice between staying and walking away gets the most attention, it is this justification has always struck me as the true rotten core of Omelas's social bargain. And it really is rotten, as well as uncomfortably familiar in how closely it echoes political and social rhetoric we hear in real life: why give the poor money if they'll only waste it on drugs, why give the unemployed jobs or the homeless houses if they won't be grateful, why gives kids an education if they'll only grow up to question us? Why give any vulnerable person what the rest of us already have if we've determined that they don't deserve it and won't appreciate it?

The people of Omelas, living their full and joyous lives, can decide if that's something they want to ask. The narrator can ask it of the visitors. The people who choose to stay or walk away can ask it of themselves and each other. The readers can ask it of themselves.

The only person who doesn't get any sort of say in the matter is the child.

Because when you do ask the child, all of the cruel, flimsy excuses propping up the city's happiness crumble to dust. Letting the child have a say reveals that everybody who benefits from this system and lets it stand is a version of Hyakkimaru's terrible father, who both subjects his son to the torment and convinces himself there is no other way. Nobody wants to cast themselves as the terrible father who sacrificed his son to demons, just as nobody wants to cast themselves as the festival-goers of Omelas who dance and sing while a child trembles in a damp cellar beneath their feet. But the deeply uncomfortable truth is that it doesn't matter if we want to see ourselves that way or not.

Even Daigo comes to understand the choice he's made, in the end. Even he eventually admits that maybe he shouldn't have outsourced his duties to a bunch of demons. Maybe he ought to have instead chosen to be a good father and a good leader, to raise both of his sons well and take care of his people himself, to put the work into finding solutions to hard problems.

As soon as you let the child speak, you have to admit that there was never a real choice between staying to do nothing and leaving to do nothing. The third choice has always been the only real choice: find a better way.

Kali Wallace studied geology and earned a PhD in geophysics before she realized she enjoyed inventing imaginary worlds more than she liked researching the real one. She is the author of science fiction, fantasy, and horror novels for children, teens, and adults. Her most recent novel is the science fiction thriller Dead Space. Her short fiction has appeared in Clarkesworld, F&SF, Asimov's, Tor.com, and other speculative fiction magazines.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Ones Who Can't Walk Away: Another Perspective on Omelas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the things I love most about fiction is the way stories talk to each other. I don't mean when one story is told in response to another, although I love that too, from the most intense scholarly research down to the silliest fanfic and memes.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.stelliform.press/index.php/2020/02/24/review-the-ones-who-stay-and-fight-by-n-k-jemisin/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Review: “The Ones Who Stay and Fight” by N.K. Jemisin ⋆ Stelliform Press

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A blog post discussing N.K. Jemisin’s “The Ones Who Stay and Fight” and its treatment of violence, utopia, and implications for climate change action.

# data[].attributes.body
https://mithilareview.com/shah_07_22/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Planet Democracy: Stories of Hope, Courage, Unity & Compassion is a special edition of Mithila Review devoted to Hopepunk - a literature of resistance, which seeks to inspire compassionate thought and positive action.
Definition
Alexandra Rowland, who is said to have coined the term, described "Hopepunk" as a form of literature that is opposite of dark and dystopian fiction: "Hopepunk says that kindness and softness doesn't equal weakness, and that in this world of brutal cynicism and nihilism, being kind is a political act. An act of rebellion."

"Hope" and "punk" are the two key elements that make hopepunk interesting and powerful. Characters who don't quit, who resist oppression, and fight for justice, for change, for democracy. There can't be hopepunk, I think, without an underlying and undying faith in global democracy and freedom.

Genre definitions come after the fact, not before. The story comes first, not genre.

In her genre-defying story "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas," Ursula K. Le Guin raises profound questions about the fundamental nature of human suffering, and the price we must pay in our quest for happiness.

Imagine you have this perfect city with zero crime and misery for all but one child. Would you trade the joy and splendor of your perfect city, your perfect country for the suffering of a lone innocent child? Or would you reject the long-established belief or tradition of your people, and choose to walk away?

There's a third choice: Would you rather stay and fight - like N. K. Jemisin wants us to - in the city of Um-Helat?

I think "Omelas" qualifies as a hopepunk story, even though it was written in 1973 - before the term's inception.

Compared to Jemisin's literary response to Guin "Those Who Stay and Fight," I think Jemisin's story "Emergency Skin" makes a far better hopepunk story.

-
Planet Democracy in Action
When we started Mithila Review in late 2015, it was an urgent plea for peace, tolerance and democracy during a time of an acute political crisis - a period of ultranationalism, radicalization and turmoil. And I'd like to believe that as a global science fiction and speculative community of visionary thinkers, storytellers, editors, publishers, all our readers and patrons, we have been able to make a small difference just by the act of existing, being, and bringing this community together.

As the founding editor and publisher of Mithila Review, my job has been anything but easy. Still I go to sleep peacefully each night knowing that we - you and I - are working to keep the hope for a peaceful, better and inclusive future alive for everyone on this planet. One cause, one special issue at a time.

In response to our call for submissions for an issue devoted to hopepunk, we received nearly two hundred stories from writers living and working in five continents. And I am truly grateful to each and every author who gave me the opportunity to read their precious work.

For long, I've resisted the idea of doing themed issues at Mithila Review because I like to give writers freedom to choose to speak their truths when the need is personal and urgent. As a writer, I know writing to a theme can be very difficult. We write when that creative dam inside us wants to burst, but the creative needs or writely muse usually doesn't align with the theme or call for submissions.

Writing is action. Writing a hopeful and positive story of change and radical kindness is an act of courage, the essence of political activism. Sometimes it takes about a day, a week or a month, even multiple years, to write, rewrite, "finish," and submit a piece of story. Let's say it takes about a hundred hours to write and send a story. It's roughly three weeks of an author's life spent working on hope - for oneself and the others: readers. 200 submissions x 3 weeks = 600 weeks divided by 52 weeks/year. That's almost twelve years' worth of conscious thinking and action for a better world.

This special edition of Mithila Review - this radiant and collective act of hope - would not have been possible without the uniting vision and tireless efforts of Dr. Amy Johnson (editor: Drones & Dreams, 2019), and the invaluable support of the team and partners at the National Democratic Institute (NDI).

Once again, thank you so much, Amy, and the whole NDI team, specially Chris Doten, Maddy (Madeleine Nicoloff), Sarah Moulton and Caitlyn Ramsey, for giving us the perfect opportunity to facilitate and organize such a global movement to strengthen our democracy at a personal and global level.

-
Planet Democracy: Table of Contents
FICTION

In Robert Bagnall's story " The Ones Who Scream America ," Quaker school teacher Sally Nodal fights against the voices she hears imploring her to hate. When the Secret Service traps her into helping them, she learns she's not alone in hearing those voices, voices that define a poisonous zeitgeist. Realizing the enormity of it all, Sally fights back - and learns a bit about modern art along the way as well.

Buzz Dixon transports us to a blazing hot future in his cinematic story "," where three of the last human truck drivers save a desperate mother and her child.

In Eve Morton's story "," two women band together to help feed a future of children who would otherwise starve.

In " This is My Home " by Mark Rivett, we come face to face with the power of technology and collective action in changing the world - whether we want it to or not.

" In The Rhythms of the World ," Johnny Caputo takes us to a distant time, where many of the ills caused by the extraction and consumption of fossil fuels have been mitigated by advanced plant and fungal technologies. But these bio-innovations don't come free of consequences. Told from the point of view of a pollution-devouring fungus, this story explores the relationships between humankind, the technologies we create, and the incomprehensibly complex cycles of life of which we are but one part.

In " Harefoot Express ," Paulo da Costa transports us to a future that still holds hope for human existence, including more inclusive and democratic forms of governing, as well as new strategies for the long process of restoring the earth's natural ecosystems and diminishing the human footprint. What will tourism and holiday travel look like a century from now? This is a time when individual limitations are accepted and understood in light of the collective steps necessary to move past a post-apocalyptic era and a more sustainable future.

In Jetse de Vries, " Zen and the Art of Gaia Maintenance," humanity seems to have finally figured out what it means to be part of the solution and not the problem.

POETRY

Mari Ness's poem "" offers a brief moment of respite - a poetic break from the preceding fiction.

J. D. Harlock's poem " Brighter Than The Last " melds solarpunk and sunshine noir to explore the harsher currents underlying our path to a solarpunk future.

In Angela Acosta's " Paradise of the Abyss ," we travel to the Yucatán Peninsula and take a tour of a burgeoning civilization, Paradise of the Abyss. There, young Piedad learns how to revitalize Earth's ancient impact crater using the knowledge of Mayan ancestors and million-world networks lightyears across.

In Florence Lenaers' poem, she asks: What would a school curriculum offer in a hopeful future? Written as a poetical take on this question, " School of Continuing Education: Excerpt of the Course Catalog " crystallized from a twofold view of education: as both an interdisciplinary web & an indefatigably continuing endeavour.

In " In My Utopias ," Gretchen Rockwell presents a series of sonnets that imagines five different utopias, looking outward as well as inward to imagine hopeful futures.

Happy reading and sharing!

PS. Our generous patrons and readers like you make every issue of Mithila Review possible. Please don't forget to subscribe and . Thank you!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hopepunk: When Hope Meets Action - Mithila Review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Planet Democracy: Stories of Hope, Courage, Unity & Compassion is a special edition of Mithila Review devoted to Hopepunk - a literature of resistance, which seeks to inspire compassionate thought and positive action.

# data[].attributes.body
https://youtu.be/fwn1tGJ477w

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Philosophy of Star Trek – Wisecrack Edition

# data[].attributes.body
https://mercatornet.com/mr_spock_the_comic_utilitarian/18371/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mr Spock, the comic utilitarian | MercatorNet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Why is there something faintly ridiculous in the logic of thinkers like Bentham, Mill and Peter Singer?

# data[].attributes.headline
How can ethics shed light on the moral decisions of The Enterprise crew?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can ethics shed light on the moral decisions of The Enterprise crew?

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/plato-pop/201305/the-ethics-star-trek-darkness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Spoiler Alert: I'm about to reveal details of the new Star Trek movie Into Darkness.

J.J. Abrams has done it again! Into Darkness was fantastic. It was visually stunning, had a surprising and exciting story, and had many classic Star Trek elements that made it a genuine Star Trek movie. What I found most fascinating - if you'll excuse the term - is how Abrams was able to incorporate elements of previous Star Trek movies into this one, and yet still keep it fresh. Having Kirk, instead of Spock, enter the engine core to save The Enterprise, and be on the other side of the glass as he died, was brilliant. And the reveal that John Harrison was actually Kahn was really enjoyable -- even though I had heard the Internet rumors, and figured it out when they started talking about 300 year old cryogenic capsules. (I should have figured it out when Kirk was pummeling him to no avail.)

I'm sure some reviewers will be critical, thinking that incorporating elements from the old movies is unoriginal. But Abrams is playing with the fascinating idea of an alternate time line, and the concept of fate. In Abram's first Star Trek movie, the villain Nero changed the past, creating an alternate timeline - one where Kirk was born in space, not Iowa, and Vulcan was destroyed. But despite the changes, it might be that certain things are fated to happen. For example, Kirk and Spock seem to be fated to battle Kahn and defeat him only at the cost of one of their lives (and shouting Kahn's name), no matter what timeline they are in. And, after all, franchise reboots always contain elements from their predecessors; no one complained when Batman had to fight The Joker, just like he always does, in Christopher Nolan's Batman reboot.

But Star Trek is notoriously more philosophical than most other sci-fi, and Abrams also managed to incorporate philosophical issues into this movie as well. The most obvious one was this: What defines that which is morally right? How can you tell what the morally right thing to do is? Kirk argues with Spock about whether or not rescuing him from the volcano on Nibiru was the morally right thing to do, Spock convinces Kirk not to kill Kahn outright but let him stand trial because it is the morally right thing to do, and Kirk sacrifices his life to save The Enterprise because he believes it is the morally right thing to do. There are a plethora of ethical theories on display, and even argued for, in Star Trek: Into Darkness.

Utilitarianism: This is the ethical theory that suggests the rightness or wrongness of an action is determined by how much happiness or pain it produces. If an action produces more happiness than pain, it is morally right; if it produces more pain than happiness, it is morally wrong. It is almost cliché - at least it has become cliché in my classroom - to use the Vulcan adage "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one" to summarize utilitarianism. The original Spock, in the original second Star Trek movie The Wrath of Khan, even quotes such reasoning directly when he sacrifices his life to save The Enterprise. Yes, entering the core will kill him, but it will save many. The new Spock engages in the same reasoning in Into Darkness when he is willing to sacrifice his life to ensure that the prime directive is not violated. Revealing an alien presence to the native people of Nibiru would contaminate their entire culture; Spock believes that the needs of the Nibiru natives outweigh his need to live.

Feminist Ethics: When Kirk rescues Spock, prime directive be damned, he is actually acting on something very similar to feminist ethics. Feminists have criticized traditional ethics by suggesting that they usually rely on masculine assumptions. For example, utilitarianism is overtly individualistic and treats every life equally. But things may not be so simple; mothers for example would gladly sacrifice two other lives to save their child, and I doubt many would morally question such an action. Would we really think a mother was a good mother if she sacrificed her child to save two others that weren't her own? Feminist ethics suggests, because of the importance of community, family and friends, it is morally acceptable to favor your own at the expense of others, if necessary. When Kirk rescues Spock from the Nibiru volcano, he is doing just that. And when Kirk objects to Spock filing a report on the incident-- throwing him under the bus, so to speak, and getting Kirk stripped of his command - Kirk does so based on feminist ethic ideals.

Kantian Duty Ethics: Kant argued that some things are morally obligatory regardless of circumstance. How did he define what was obligatory? Suppose you are considering doing a particular kind of action - like lying. Kant argued that if universalizing that action (if everyone doing it) would lead to a contradiction, we are morally obligated to not perform that action. Since if everyone lied all the time, communication would be impossible (and thus lying would be impossible) Kant thought that we were always morally obligated not to lie, regardless of the circumstance. Vulcans, and Spock in particular, follow this rule by never lying.

Virtue Ethics: The virtue ethicist doesn't so much offer up a definition of what is right and wrong, but is more concerned with figuring out how to behave virtuously. Behaving correctly is more important than understanding what makes your behavior correct. They suggest that we can do this by emulating moral exemplars. We identify virtuous people and then try to behave as they would behave. Kirk is acting in line with virtue ethics when he saves The Enterprise at the cost of his own life. He tells Spock, as he sits dying on the irradiated side of the glass, that he did it because that is what Spock would have done.

The new Star Trek movie can also be used to point out where these theories conflict. For example, Dr. Carol Marcus lies to get on The Enterprise -and that is something that Spock would never do. But, when you think about it, perhaps he should. After all, she wouldn't have been there to stop her father from destroying The Enterprise had she not lied. Shouldn't Spock realize that sometimes his need not to lie can be outweighed by the needs of the many?

If ethical theories conflict, how are we to decide what we ought to do? Ted Schick suggests that we might approach ethnical questions like scientists approach scientific questions. Comparing competing scientific hypotheses is not an all or nothing ordeal. Scientists use the criteria of adequacy: testability, fruitfulness, scope, simplicity and conservativism. All the hypotheses that you are considering may fit one or more criteria, but the one that fits the most is clearly preferable. And if there is a tie, we may have to say that we simply don't know which one is true.

We can approach ethics in a similar way. The scientific criteria themselves will not be useful, but we can replace them with the ethical theories we have considered. When considering whether or not to do an action, ask yourself how many ethical theories would suggest that you should perform that action. If all or most of them say you should, then it is most likely morally right. If none of them do, or most don't, then it is probably wrong. And if some say you should, and some say you shouldn't, we may just have to admit that we don't know whether it is right or wrong.

This approach would likely vindicate the actions of who arguably is the biggest hero in the film, Scotty, who saves The Enterprise from a bigger and better ship in much the same way that he did in Star Trek III: The Search for Spock-- by sabotaging the other ship. The thing Scotty did that this approach would likely vindicate is his refusal to sign for the advanced mystery torpedoes that the Admiral wants to put on The Enterprise. Nearly every ethical theory would suggest he did the right thing. Because the torpedoes could have something on them that could interfere with the operation of the ship, and even destroy it, utility would applaud him for looking after the needs of the many. The feminist would applaud him for looking after the safety of his crew. Kant may suggest that he did something wrong because he disobeyed an order (and if you universalize disobeying orders they become meaningless). Then again, he may have a duty as an engineer to always know what is on his ship; universalizing a lack of such concern could be equally contradictory. Regardless, he seems to be behaving as a good engineer should, and thus would be vindicated by virtue ethics. All in all, I conclude that Scotty clearly did the morally right thing.

And I also conclude that Star Trek: Into Darkness was a great Star Trek movie. And off I go to see it in the theater again.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spoiler Alert: I'm about to reveal details of the new Star Trek movie Into Darkness. J.J. Abrams has done it again! Into Darkness was fantastic. It was visually stunning, had a surprising and exciting story, and had many classic Star Trek elements that made it a genuine Star Trek movie.

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pXAKrx-8RzyiILBAKWEXKwh0oGev0sDznieM9wSRkfY/edit?usp=sharing

# data[].attributes.body
"In a lot of cases, people read science fiction and fantasy when they’re younger and then they age out of it."- I chose this quote because it is true for me, as a child I only ever read science fiction and fantasy. Today these are likely my least read genres. I relate this quote to the allegory of the cave because the transition between reading fantasy to reading more realistic books reminds me of the transition of naivety to enlightenment mentioned in the allegory of the cave. This quote is talking about real life and how fantasy and science fiction is typically read by children.

"But the one thing I could not
imagine was a society stemming from our own that was truly inclusive, truly egalitarian, and truly good for all people."- This quote really made me think, I too have questioned how our society could ever become utopian, there is so much prejudice in the world how could that all just disappear? In this quote N.K.Jemisin is referencing to the story of Omelas and how the fact that a truly perfect society could not have stemmed from our current society shown by the child in the basement. This relates t real life because everywhere you look in our world someone is suffering for our benefit.

"I mean, the alternative is to pretend that harm wasn’t done."-I chose this quote because it mad me remember the suffering of others for my benefit that I have forgotten. This is exactly what many people in Omelas do, forget about the children in the basement. besides the few activists, most of our society choses to forget about the sweat shops, homeless, and people in people in poverty ,to preserve their happiness.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The ethic of the story is that one cannot absolve oneself of the responsibility for the system under which one lives, and while one might not be able to change it, one must stay engaged in one’s community and fight for change

a. During this summer I had a job working along the river where part of my daily tasks was to pick up trash around the banks. Because of this I saw how much waste there actually was, and I realized that preventing this pollution would be a collective effort. My friends and I spent many days at the river and I doubt that we did not contribute to this problem at all. However, thanks to my job we were able to hand out trash bags and promote recycling within the community. It was a collective effort to fight for a change that may typically go unnoticed.

b. In ‘The Ones Who Stay and Fight’, the people we know as caretakers are not blind to the injustices that are committed in our world and thus they are aware of the innate nature of placing value on something. They understand that the system they work to protect requires a constant helping hand or so it will become tainted with our ideas. These caretakers work together so they can prevent this spread of corruption which is why they take the child in and attempt to teach it to follow the same course.

c. In 2020, the Black Lives Matter movement was picking up haste and there were many more people attending protests to help raise awareness and fight against discrimination. Rather than allowing the system to overshadow their voices, they worked together and though they would not have been able to do things as an individual, they worked as a community to be heard.

2. Those of us enjoying the benefits of a Western, fossil-fuel economy are living at the grace of a system which keeps    a child in the closet — millions of children

a. Our generation is the one that is officially beginning to acknowledge the problem that climate change is causing and we are looking for solutions. However because of methods put into place by past generations, the young adults and teenagers are having to push to promote methods of conservation that should be common practice.

b. The children living in the closet are synonymous with the child who lost her father in Um-Helat. They both suffered at the hands of the society that was meant to protect them and keep them happy. Though in Um-Helat, the child was given the opportunity to grow, where in comparison the child in Omelas remained to suffer. The question is whether we as a society will ignore this problem and become the child in the closet or face it head on and be given the chance that they gave the young girl.

c. Scientists have discovered that there are only 10 years left until the effects of climate change are irreversible. The adults who neglect these problems will only be around for half the amount of time that we will be. They won’t see the food shortages that come with it, the trash that washes upon the shore, or the contaminated rain.

3. Readers could have been comforted, after all, by a utopia that harms no one and specifically rejects violence perpetrated against innocents.

a. I know that for me personally I can turn a blind eye if something bad is happening. It hurts to acknowledge the pain that people can cause someone that didn’t do anything to deserve that. At a camp I went to we had a whole conversation about human trafficking and how to prevent it, and hearing all those stories that people shared made me realize just how much we can miss the violent actions of those around us.

b. In Omelas, the people that live there are aware of what is happening to the child living in the basement but they choose not to help it. They allow it to suffer for their own benefit, and some are so overcome by the desire to aid it that they have to leave. They reject that injustice against an innocent child by leaving because they could not find comfort while knowing what was happening

c. Do we as a society not do this to our own history books? We cover the slaughtering of innocent minorities just so we can feel better about what we’ve built. Not knowing feels so much better than knowing that you did something wrong. Ignorance is bliss.

# data[].attributes.headline
Pluto LaCoss: Framework for Exploring Dystopias/Utopias

# data[].attributes.subject
Pluto LaCoss: Framework for Exploring Dystopias/Utopias

# data[].attributes.body
1. “Question 12. What is the status of religion? Does it exist and, if so, in what form? Who/what is “unworshipped.””

1. Text-to-self

1. I used to be Christian due to my parents practicing the religion themselves, but as I have grown I now am Pagan. My religion affects my daily life as I find different aspects of life sacred and powerful than what my parents consider sacred and powerful.

2. Text-to-text

1. In Le Guin’s, “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas,” state, “But really it would be better not to have any temples in Omelas--at least, not manned temples. Religion yes, clergy no.” In Omelas, there is a religion for people to practice and feel a sense of connection, but there is no leader who leads them, it is all self-led by the people of Omelas. Religion is present in Omelas because it makes people happy, but, it is not present for everyone because it is not something everyone values as something to make them happy. Religion may affect some of society but does not run it, and people do not run religion to run society as not everyone in Omelas practice religion.

3. Text-to-world

1. There is organized religion in the real world, but the biggest difference between the utopia that Le Guin shows us is how other people run religion. With specific people running or being the head of churches, Le Guin would agree that our society is not close to a utopia as there is a clergy. There are too many cases of unhappiness within different religions due to corruption or the force of religion upon children as a tool to brainwash people. While this does not happen to a point of an epidemic, there are enough people who come forward with the horrors of their own experiences and the abuses within churches from the people who are supposed to bring happiness to those very people who are being abused.

2. “Question 4. Is ignorance or knowledge valued more? Is knowledge seen as dangerous or subversive?”

1. Text-to-self

1. This is almost the exact same question we were asked for the short answers over the Allegory of the Cave.

2. Text-to-text

1. In Plato’s, “The Allegory of the Cave,” Plato talks about how philosophers are enlightened and see the world truly and how, once they try to share their knowledge, they are seen as stupid while they view themselves as intelligent. Philosophers who are enlightened believe that this lack of knowledge of the people still in the cave is dangerous and they must be enlightened. On the flip side, the people in the cave do not know the knowledge of the real world, so it does not affect them as they do not know what they are missing out on. There is this constant battle between these two groups, the philosophers always believing that with this lack of knowledge, the people in the cave are doing a disservice to themselves.

3. Text-to-world

1. Plato created his allegory because he thought that it was harmful to other people who were not as ‘enlightened,’ as he was. He believed that the world around him was being damaged because of this lack of knowledge, however, how can a person be harming the rest of the world if their bubble does not have this knowledge? It does not harm the person who doesn’t know the information, rather, it harms them once they, ‘leave the cave,’ and look back on themselves when they were still seated in the cave. Plato connected this train of thought to his world around him to help other people understand how he saw the world for them to be ‘enlightened,’ as they did not challenge the way that they thought like a philosopher did (whatever that means, Plato was kind of strange.) He saw how people did not challenge their thoughts and created an allegory to explain his thought process.

3. “Question 16. What roles do history and the past play in the text?”

1. Text-to-self

1. Every person learns from their past mistakes and this is very true for me as well. Learning music for me has been built on making a mistake, then fixing it to build up a skill. If I look at a piece of sheet music, I only know what the paper is telling me because I had gone through years of training and trial and error to be able to fully understand what was in front of me to be fluent in reading music.

2. Text-to-text

1. In Jemisin’s, “The Ones Who Stay and Fight,” the author writes, “There is history rather than malice (...), and it is still being actively, intentionally corrected (...)” Jemisin mentions how Um-Helatians recognize the history of where they come from as a way for the entire society to move past the complicated history of their city. Jemisin talks about this factor of history playing a part in Um-Helats culture because, later, the author compares Um-Helat to America and how for America to become a Utopia like Um-Helat, there must be change in America on how people view the history and it’s foundation as complicated, but not just acknowledge history, actively and intentionally correcting it, as they put it.

3. Text-to-world

1. Jemisin writes, “Racism is natural. (...) Sexism is natural and homophobia is natural and religious intolerance is natural and greed is natural and cruelty is natural (...).” Jemisin includes this part while talking to the reader directly as a call out of all of the terrible things that are ‘allowed,’ by people like the reader due to the ‘biases,’ that they hold. Jemisin directly points a finger at the reader who represents any and everyone who might hold these values, and demands change.

# data[].attributes.body
“Kirk argues with Spock about whether or not rescuing him from the volcano on Nibiru was the morally right thing to do, Spock convinces Kirk not to kill Kahn outright but let him stand trial because it is the morally right thing to do, and Kirk sacrifices his life to save The Enterprise because he believes it is the morally right thing to do.”

1. A personal connection I have made through this quote is that I also believe that we should not just immediately kill the people who are ‘bad’ in this society, but rather try to reform them.

2. This statement connects to the philosophy of Um - Helat, where the social workers try to cure the girl who has become ‘intoxicated’ from evil instead of killing her, similar to how Spock argues to put Kahn on trial rather than killing him. There can be another connection made between this quote and the statements made in Machiavelli’s Prince where he claims that even though a leader must  be feared, he should not be hated, for it will cause rebellion and uproar. This hate can be caused by viciously killing people and not hearing the demands or remarks of the people.

3. Today’s government and judiciary system established (theoretically) can be seen with the ideology presented by the quote. Criminals are put on trial where their justice is decided, accordingly following the 4 amendment by not imposing cruel or unusual punishments.

“The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one”

1. I connected this statement to a hypothetical scenario I had seen recently where 5 people were tied to a trolley and if you were to pull a lever, the trolley would go off track running over 1 person. This scenario represents the whole concept of saving the majority, which I personally would do by pulling the lever.

2. This concept can also be seen in the Omelas story, with the suffering of the boy in the closet (the one) for the benefit of the whole town (the majority) which connects strongly to the quote.

3. In today's world, this concept is very well prevalent and utilized. From the suffering and exploitation of 3rd world countries for resources and items, to the top elite riding off the backs of the middle and lower classes.

“Behaving correctly is more important than understanding what makes your behavior correct. They suggest that we can do this by emulating moral exemplars.”

1. I relate to this quote deeply, because I also learned and understand what good behavior is from exemplars who are regarded as high virtuosos and do acts of ‘good.’

2. This quote can be realized through Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, where the prisoner is freed from the cave, may come down to get other prisoners and free them of their shackles. Most refuse, but some may want the freedom representing the virtuoso present in the story.

3. In today’s world, many young adults and children follow celebrities and what they do. From influencers, Hollywood stars, to singers etc, they praise them to the highest degree. This however, also leads to them trying to act like their idols, which can be good or bad depending on their role models and to what extent they try to mimic them.

# data[].attributes.body
a. The main reason I chose to respond to Pluto is because of the first quote they chose as their point of discussion. I know the pressure that a family can put on you to follow in their religious path, and I am also distinctly aware that discovering your own beliefs is incredibly difficult if you don't have a system of support. It's nice to know that there are others who went through a similar experience, it makes the whole ordeal a little more tolerable.

b. How did you discover that you didn't want to follow the religion you were raised upon? Personally for me I identified as Christian until I learned about the concept of agnosticism was. As for the second question I would love to hear more about your ideas on if knowledge is perceived as dangerous. If you believe that do you think that people who have more knowledge are more likely to manipulate those without it?

c. Relating to your second question I would like to mention some of the ideas presented in Lois Lowrey's 'The Giver'. Jonas, the main character of the novel, received many snippets of memories from our world. They were not concepts he understood from the utopian society that he inhabited. They caused him harm both physically and emotionally. Knowledge is dangerous because with memories of the past we are less likely to repeat them, but still the ideas of that time can worm their way into our psyche and make us more susceptible to that violent tendencies.

# data[].attributes.body
I am replying to Ruby because she talked about climate change, I have always been very vocal about this issue so ruby's comment caught my interest. Ruby uses a lot of cold hard facts in her writing. You seem very upset about the injustices of the world but state that you can turn a blind eye to them, I would like to hear more of your reasoning for this. One thing I would like to add to your writing is the fact that although some people may find the Utopia comforting, others may find it unsettling.

# data[].attributes.body
I decided to reply to you because of the first quote you chose, it really made me think. Do you agree with Jemisin's statement that racism, hemophobia, and sexism, ect. is natural? One thing I would like to add is that religion varies from person to person, for example two Christians can go to the same church but till practice the religion in different ways.

# data[].attributes.body
I chose to respond to you because of your first text to self connection. I often have the problem of wondering whether homeless people are actually telling the truth, of course you want to believe them but you never know. What is your opinion on "the end justifies the means? What I would like to add is that this assignment is not complete.

# data[].attributes.body
text to self- Spock is quoted in this article to have "emotional barrenness"- something anyone who has seen the show would disagree with. Spock is definitely capable of showing love and affection- and even though not as much romance, definite friendship. I can connect to the character in how he thinks through each scenario in a rational way.
text to text- Spock's character can relate to the story of those who walk away from Omelas in only his own self- sacrificing scene, where he takes his final breath letting out the words, "the needs of many outweigh the needs of one". but would he have made that decision if it was Kirk in that scenario? Attatchment is obvious to get in the way of utilitarian thinking.
text to world- spock is compared to real-world philosophers and often quoted as a "utilitarian" but because of the fictional aspects of the Star Trek world, taking Spock's advice would not be ideal in our world.

# data[].attributes.body
"They’re not that bad, but you see the formula and once you’ve seen the formula a couple of times, you get tired of it. There are always people within the genre who are perfectly happy with that formula and they seek out that comfort food every time they read, but a lot of readers move on." - I relate to this quote because I feel like I read mostly the same type of book. I actually play a game with my friends when we're reading the same book or watching the same show to guess the ending. The formula is very obvious, but I stick with it because of its comfort. This idea of moving on reminds me of the allegory of the cave. I guess I'm still stuck in my cave and don't want to "become enlightened" with new types of texts. It also reminds me of one of my friends who absolutely refuses to read anything other than children's fantasy/fiction. She hates nonfiction and will always stick to children's books. I feel like a lot of people that read a lot when they're younger tend to do this kind of thing. They attach to specific types of writing or certain subjects.

"With Le Guin’s story, at the end of it, she’s suggesting that the only way to create a society that is a better place is to walk away from this one or to go off the grid." - I feel like this idea is spoken about a lot. Personally, I want to move out of Texas for college to get a new perspective/be around other types of people, but I've heard others talk about how it doesn't really matter. There are liberals everywhere and conservatives everywhere. There are racists and homophobes and capitalist corporations in every US state. It's almost impossible to escape. It also reminds me of how "The ones who stay and fight" is about creating a better world instead of leaving to find one. The premise of the story is that the people decided to stay and fight instead of fleeing to a "better place".

"And the only way that I could do it was to basically point out that the flaw is ideological. The idea that you have to have someone suffering is the flaw." - This reminds me of Machiavelli's "The Prince". The premise of that story is to create the best society you can while dealing with current standards instead of trying to create a better situation. The idea is to keep power by manipulating the system. In a way, "The ones who stay and fight" has the same idea. The social workers manipulate the system to stay in power. The difference is what type of system is set up. Personally, I believe that this type of thinking works. If you know the system well enough, it's very easy to use it as a resource. I don't think that change shouldn't be sought out, but it's true that in order to make that change, you have to have knowledge of the system in place. For all of history, people have created change by manipulating the system. Presidential elections, governmental systems, the supreme court, and banking systems. All of these things have rules of operation. Nothing can change without knowledge of those rules and manipulation of them.

# data[].attributes.body
1."As soon as you let the child speak, you have to admit that there was never a real choice between staying to do nothing and leaving to do nothing. The third choice has always been the only real choice: find a better way."- I like how the author brings up Omelas and uses the anime to prove a point on how there was a third option to the bleak outcomes brought into Omelas. You could leave or stay but the child still suffers, but there was always a third option of fixing this corrupted system. The city might fall, but the people can help rebuild it without the suffering of a child.

2."Because when you do ask the child, all of the cruel, flimsy excuses propping up the city’s happiness crumble to dust. Letting the child have a say reveals that everybody who benefits from this system and lets it stand is a version of Hyakkimaru’s terrible father"-When I first read this, it really helped me bring Omelas back into perspective and it's morals. If the theoretical child could speak up about it's suffering, people's excuses for letting this suffering continue would be shallow. People can easily justify the suffering of others when they don't have a say in it. They feel that Utilitarianism thinking of sacrificing less for the prosperity of more.

3."Upon seeing the destruction caused by defeating the demons, Dororo does ask if they are doing the right thing—because Dororo is a war orphan who knows suffering intimately, and because the demon-killing quest is obviously having a terrible effect on Hyakkimaru himself."- In the anime, they turn Omelas into a more grounded story where the child in the cellar is let out. They regain their life little by little throughout the story which is painful, but also makes Omelas crumble with it. The third option to Omelas is the hardest one to stick to compared to leaving or accepting the grief and staying. The child in the cellar would feel pain as it recovers from it's many scars of suffering and the city would break down with it. That leaves the hardest choice after. To stay and rebuild Omelas into something better, or abandon the ruins of a corrupt bargain of a society. In the anime, the father who made his child suffer for the bargain, decides that relative peace at the cost of his son was too much and decides to rebuild his land into something better without the help of a corrupt bargain like Omelas.

# data[].attributes.body
Text to Self-"the sole evidence it is possible to produce that anything is desirable, is that people do actually desire it" yes that is the quote.
My reaction to this quote is anyone can make something they desire and the people who make it are people who truly have a strong desire for what it is they want .

Text to Text-"The party whose interest is in question "refers to" anything that can suffer"

i can somewhat relate this to Omelas. The party who has interest to the kid in the shed who is that person who suffers and is the reason Omelas is still there and the way it is. the party who wants to know more about the kid will never know fully because they cant if they do anything to the  kid it is the end of Omelas.

Text to World-"never kill the innocent except to save more innocent lives

there are people in the world who have died to save many many other people it can be from their blood or a organ that is needed from someone else. In some places people are left to die in or they can be very sick like with Ebola when people cant get treated they will make sure that sick person will not get out so they don't spread it and cause more people to die that is when it is okay to kill an innocent person. Sometimes it takes a lot of people to die from something for a state or community to start becoming more strict on it and make the areas safer and more secure

# data[].attributes.body
“— you and I — are working to keep the hope for a peaceful, better and inclusive future alive for everyone on this planet. One cause, one special issue at a time.”

1. I believe together as whole we are all changing the world even though it little by little every action we take has an outcome and as whole what we do , even the little things do matter , affecting the future, making either positive or negative effects

2. Like in the city of um health people here work together to make things work , for this issue it works to uplift people and writers across the world creating a positive and happy effect for society. LIke how in um helat people work together to uplift others and how the social workers are there to spread positivity and take down anything negative so the society can thrive .

3. This is a real life scenario, he states how you and I , work together for peaceful inclusive future and we do , the actions we all take affect our future and the outcomes of our future , for him it may be “one special issue at a time” for us it may be just being there for friend , respecting your teacher or helping your mom , even the smallest of your actions will affect a future outcome so thats why it matter what you put into the world.

“Hopepunk says that kindness and softness doesn’t equal weakness, and that in this world of brutal cynicism and nihilism, being kind is a political act. An act of rebellion.”

1. I agree with this quote highly, being kind and soft should not equal weakness towards another human being. If anything it should show you are stronger for choosing a higher path to help people, being kind has become controversial when in my opinion should be the obvious decision in the first place.

2.  This quote relates to um-helat, while the social workers “kill evil” they also show mercy on those who have been infected and extend a hand to them to help them see the world with kindness and a soft heart rather than with angry, um-helat is purely functional due to the kindness in people's hearts which puts in the drive for equality for everyone to be treated equally . What is looked dwn upon is making other people feel bad and being praised is bringing others up with created a functional society for them.

3. The quote relates to the real world in many ways , many believe that it better to choose rash ways and act in terms to show aggression , like the machiavellis allegory of the cave he even states it better for a leader to be cruel rather than kind, but in the real world i simply refuse to believe that true, leaders who have been kind to citizens have better lead countries, students who treat their teachers in a kind way and vice versa have better grades and better teacher student relation to where in the classroom they can function better and get help . People like Putin have said to react to kindness is to react weakly but look at his current status in the world and what people think of of him, much less how his entire country has been cut off from everyone else.

“There’s a third choice: Would you rather stay and fight — like N. K. Jemisin wants us to — in the city of Um-Helat? - says how omelas you can stay or leave  but in the um helat there is a third option”

1. When I saw this quote it had left a mark on me because reading the story of Omelas it does only seem to give you too options you either say and live in ecstasy or you choose to leave to clear your conscious, but both of those options do nothing to make a change , in um-helat it is shown that there is more you not only can just leave or stay, but you can choose to stay and fight and actually make difference instead of leaving it complacent or just as is.

2. THis quote is obvious link into the Omelas and um-helat text, it references how in omelas two options are given while in um-helat the third is the one chosen, because of this while similar in sense there are two very different societies in the texts, in omelas they live in a type of ecstasy where they all either leave or strive off the pain of one, while in um-helat while a utopia the problems are acknowledged and dealt with the society works together to make its functional utopia rather than falling back on sheer persons pain to help the society.

3. In the real world we are also given options as a society, as our own individual sleeves, most people “choose to leave” by ignoring the problems we have in society or doing small things to not support but we do not change the negative impact, while some just purely ignore everything and are happy , and have more “it is what it is” attitude about it all, but then people such as activist people who work to reform the way we have society corrupt politics those are the ones who choose to stay and fight. While the majority act more like the people in the story of Omelas we all do have the potential (though we dont act on it) to be like the people in the story of um-helat.

# data[].attributes.body
text to world.      "I think Octavia Butler said something to the effect of, Don’t rely on inspiration. You have to rely on habit. Habit is more useful when you’re actually trying to get work done on deadline" i choose this this quote because to me it hits home i believe that you need to work hard and grind to get thing you want in life or for anything. Many people think they are supposed to be giving things, or thing should just fall into there lap's. I say this with mindset set targeted so to say at this new gen-Z because they dont want to work for anything but wan to change everything and expect it to just to  happen over night. i mean you look up what the gen-Z vaule you and the meaning or defilation for it is " Gen Z workers value stability in their work, which makes sense, considering Gen Zers were children or teenagers at the height of the Great Recession in 2008. More than half of Gen Z workers would quit a job if it was preventing them from enjoying life" so think that this quote from Octavia Butler is prefect for the younger people to hear. -
text to self
"But the one thing I could not
imagine was a society stemming from our own that was truly inclusive, truly egalitarian, and truly good for all people."- This quote really made me think, I too have questioned how our society could ever become utopian, there is so much prejudice in the world how could that all just disappear? In this quote N.K.Jemisin is referencing to the story of Omelas and how the fact that a truly perfect society could not have stemmed from our current society shown by the child in the basement. i dont think into todays society we would be ok with out trying to fix something i really think we cant and wont be able to life happily in and utopia and if we could how long do you think i would really last?
Text to text

# data[].attributes.body
1. "Would you trade the joy and splendor of your perfect city, your perfect country for the suffering of a lone innocent child? Or would you reject the long-established belief or tradition of your people, and choose to walk away?

There’s a third choice: Would you rather stay and fight..."

- T to S: As someone who wishes to see change, I believe the only way for change to be achived is to fight tooth and nail for it until actions are taken for it.
- T to T: In Omelas, a perfect society is only obtainable by building it off of the suffering of others, and action simply cannot happen because there will always be some kind of injustice, regardless of any attempt to create change. Um-Helat however, was able to create a perfect society by seeing the mistakes of the previous civilization before them, and disposing of any individual that could potentially create another "child in the basement" situation. One removes themselves from the situation, while the other removes those contributing to the problem.
- T to W: Modern civilization is often of the belief that predgaduce is only natural, and fighting against it simply won't work. Many are completely unaware of the powers that simply taking actions to achieve equality actually hold.

2. "Writing is action. Writing a hopeful and positive story of change and radical kindness is an act of courage, the essence of political activism."
- T to S: I am someone who cannot fight for equality in the ways I would like to, so being able to take action by creating something that will hopefully inspire others to do so is very useful.
- T to T: Many of the people in Omela's find themselves in a situation where the only action they can actually take is to remove themselves from a society that thrives off of the suffering of a singular individual. Therefore, even doing something as simply creating something to inspire others to do so may cause the fall of their civilization as a whole. Um-Helat on the other hand, became inspired to create a perfect society after viewing the wrongdoings of an ancient civilization that ultimately collapsed as a result of nothing being done to fix anything.
- T to W: Throughout history, many forms of communication have been utilized in order to inspire those who wish to take action to improve upon society. Speeches speaking out against racial injustice in America, works of literature that put a spotlight on the many instances of targeted hate crimes and terrorist attacks against minorities. These, and many more, have inspired the masses in one way or another to take action in improving civilization and achieving equality.

3. "There can’t be hopepunk, I think, without an underlying and undying faith in global democracy and freedom."
- T to S: I, like many others, have always dreamed of a world where everyone could truly be equal in every sense of the word. With this came my firm belief in the strength of democracy, and how sharing this mindset with everyone else could one day achieve a "hopepunk" society.
- T to T: It's possible that many of the citizens within Omela's shared a similar vision of being able to thrive without the constant suffering of the child in the cellar. It's even clearer to see that those who chose to no longer contribute to the endless torment of the child were indeed firm belivers in a "hopepunk" like vision, but were forced to leave due to the lack of other options. In the city of Um-Helat, it's civilians no longer have to imagine a hopepunk society, as they have already taken ever action neccassary for achieving the one they're currently living in, due to their firm stances on the strength of freedom and democracy.
-T to W: While modern society is nowhere near a hopepunk civilization, there are still plenty of individuals out there who firmly believe in democracy and the powers it holds. If enough of these people were to gather together, they would be able to take action to ensure that a hopepunk society is reached.

# data[].attributes.headline
kessler: framework for exploring dystopias/utopias 

# data[].attributes.subject
kessler: framework for exploring dystopias/utopias 

# data[].attributes.body
1. 2- How Is happiness defined in society?

Quote text to text

“They were not simple folk, you see, though they were happy. But we do not say the words of cheers much anymore.” Omelas

In the case of the story Omelas, this society with no structural social hierarchy, supposedly everyone in this world, is happy except for only one person.

Quote Text to Self.

When I think about the society of Omelas, I imagine how I would function in this world. Would I truly be happy if happiness were forced? Especially for the person who suffers to keep the happiness of this society. It almost feels impossible to live in a world that is truly sustainable and happy.

Text to World- When I think about this question, I think about the relation of happiness in the world of Omelas. Omeal is a place where it's almost impossible to be sad or mad or any other time of emotion other than happiness. It’s almost a forced happiness, a sacred place.

2.   4- Is ignorance or knowledge seen as more valued?

Is knowledge seen as dangerous?

Quote Text to text

. In the case of Omelas, I believe that there is a point of ignorance until there are those who choose to learn the truth and know that knowledge comes with the consequences of never going back to the happiness of ignorance. For instance, when the child is found in such a state trapped in a room with no knowledge from outside of the room it's a type of shock that the civilians have never experienced in their life until that moment that is so shocking that it stays with them for the rest of their lives.

Quote text to self

As a person, if I was born and raised in the fictional world of both Omelas and Um-helat, I would be curious to learn that there was a not-so-successful, prosperous society. But if I got the choice to live in this better society, I would take that choice.

Quote text to the world.

When you connect our world to the Omelas and Um-helat world, there is some sort of knowledge that changes a person's perspective on life and it forever has a lasting impact on how they view the world. Usually, this knowledge in our world makes people more conscious of how our society is structured and how problematic it is to other people's lives.

3-   16. What roles does history play in the stories

Text to Text

I believe that in Um-helat the story makes connections between both America and Omelas and the history of both and shows how different it is from both worlds. When the world is described as perfect. In reality, there is no big twist where the perfect society doesn't exist, but there are still strict rules to keep that peace.

Text to self as I read the story of Um-helat America is mentioned in the story as a historical event that took place. Um-helat is a futuristic society that takes place when America was in the past. It described America as a barbaric society that children in Um-helat can not grasp or understand how people used to strive by how unfair and problematic it was.

Text to word- When we think about the history of America, the social hierarchy was by no means the best, but the history of America that it is today is based on the past and growing from those mistakes. Although our society has grown, it might be possible that it could never be perfect just of how accustomed we are to living in this built society that already exists that we hardly focus on others' sufferings for our sustainability.

# data[].attributes.body
1) #3: "What is the status of progress (science/technology) within the society?"

Text to Self: I lived in Saudi Arabia on the KAUST compound for 3 years when I was younger.  It was beautiful there. I remember the canals, clean beaches, cruise ships, our big fancy house, and all the perfectly manicured green spaces around the university where my dad worked. We lived right on the red sea, and the compound felt like it's own advanced society compared to the rest of Saudi Arabia.

Text to Text: Technology in Um-Helat is more advanced than in Omelas. There was no mention of anyone working jobs in Omelas. However, 'farmers are honored alongside merchants and technologers' in Um-Helat, and everyone is expected to contribute to society's prosperity.

Text to World: Since these perfect societies don't exist in the real world, factors like location and a country's economy play a huge role in their technological development. For example, Singapore is in an ideal location to be a center of international trade and commerce, hence they have the economy to support technological advancement, while the Congo remains one of the world's poorest countries because of weak economic policy and government corruption, despite having trillions of dollars worth of minerals.

2) #11: "How much emphasis is placed on community or solidarity?"

Text to Self: All my life my mom has placed a big emphasis on family and community because it is important to help your community and be close with your family so one day when you need help they will be there. Additionally, I'm going to the air force after I graduate and the military 'family' you meet during bootcamp become your support group. You need a strong community to lift each other up.

Text to Text: Um-Helat places a big emphasis on community, as everyone is equal there, and everyone takes care of each other. In Omelas, there is a strong and overall happy community, as well as an emphasis on how parents love and care for their children more tenderly because they know about the child in the basement, and it reminds them not to take their loved ones for granted.

Text to World: The 'American Dream' is to be self made and independent. I think in the US especially, being a strong individual is so encouraged that people no longer lean on one another for help. My grandparents tell stories about how their community would never hesitate to help each other out- if someone had a baby they would help cook or watch the kids, or if someone was building a house neighbors would pitch in, if someone's power went out neighbors would invite them over for dinner. There was a social contract of looking out for everybody, but it's a different time now.

3. #22: "Are there characters who are other? (they don't belong/fit in)"

Text to Self: I graduate a year early in May, and I sometimes feel out of place too. I'm taking senior and junior classes so I'm in the middle and I never know what to say when people ask what grade I'm in because I'm the age of a junior graduating this year.

Text to Text: Both Omelas and Um-Helat have examples of this. The child in Omelas is the 'other', and they use this as justification for the child's suffering.  It's easier to bear the guilt when they convince themselves the child is 'too degraded to know any real joy'. However in Um-Helat, the 'others' are the peacekeepers. They stand out, they are different but necessary like the child in Omelas. The peacekeepers are on the outside, because they have been exposed to our world. They can't go back to 'ordinary life' with the rest of the people.

Text to World: Repeatedly in history, leaders have used 'othering' as a justification for their actions. 'Othering' allows for passing blame, unacceptance, or fear of outside influence. This is why Japan closed its doors for over 200 years, and we have restrictions on immigration, and there is racism. Humans are afraid of others who aren't like them.

# data[].attributes.body
a) I'm replying to Pluto's post because I also have a personal connection to religion. Growing up my mom homeschooled me and my siblings, and religion was a big part of our day implemented into part of our schoolwork. I agree that parents do play a big role in our religion, especially when we are younger, but I don't think that is always necessarily a bad thing. My parents made the choice for me to be catholic when I was a baby through baptism, and that's how I was raised. However, now that I'm older I was able to make that choice on my own.
b) What made you choose to switch from Christian to Pagan? Regarding your second question, what knowledge do you think is considered 'dangerous'? And based on your third question, do you think our world today is capable of 'moving away' from the world's complicated history like the people of Um-Helat?
c) Adding onto your second question, knowledge can absolutely be a good and useful thing, but sometimes it is better not to know. In the military, soldiers stationed overseas have a lot of restrictions on what they can tell their family about where they are and what they are doing. Refraining from sharing knowledge is for their families safety.

# data[].attributes.body
a) I also stick with the same genre because that's my comfort zone and it's what I enjoy reading. The last 5 books I've read have been about WWII, and I'm now reading one about the Vietnam War. Historical fiction seems to be a constant.
b) What does it look like to 'stay and fight' in our world? How many people would it take to actually make a difference? What does a 'better world' look like?
c) Adding onto your last point, a really good example of this is from AP US History, the Gilded Age. Corruption was everywhere, and it's because rich people knew how to manipulate the 'system' of government and corporations. They used tactics like vertical and horizontal integration to gain monopolies on products and eliminate competition, and they got away with it by paying politicians to turn a blind eye.

# data[].attributes.body
a) I also believe in second chances. A quote I really like is from the Book Rose Under Fire by Elizabeth Wein, "fight with realistic hope, not to destroy all the world's wrong, but to renew its good." I think that is a very important thing to keep in mind when it comes to life and death of a 'bad' person. They should have a chance at redemption.
b) In regards to you second quote, what would a 'better world look like? What new methods would it take to get us there? How much would you be willing to give up to make that change?
c) Although celebrities influence trends and how we dress and act, I think it a person's morals, priorities, and definition of 'good' come from who they were around when they were growing up. Parents/guardians ultimately set the examples of 'the right way to act' long before we understand why it's right or considered acceptable.

# data[].attributes.body
1. “Feminist ethics suggests, because of the importance of community, family and friends, it is morally acceptable to favor your own at the expense of others, if necessary.”

A. I personally agree with this reasoning that it is okay to favor your friends and family at the expense of others, when only necessary.

B. This can relate to Omelas' story, where the people favor themselves and their families, living in ignorance from the suffering child.

C. This can be applied to survivors and survivalist stories, where parents look out for their children and would possibly kill anyone to make sure their children survive. This could also be applied to Machiavelli’s The Prince, where he explains that a leader should favor his own power and subordinates at the expense of others.

2.  “The new Spock engages in the same reasoning in Into Darkness when he is willing to sacrifice his life to ensure that the prime directive is not violated. Revealing an alien presence to the native people of Nibiru would contaminate their entire culture; Spock believes that the needs of the Nibiru natives outweigh his need to live.”

A.  I can relate to this quote because it aligns with my morals, that my life can have more value if it is to serve and protect others. I want to serve in the military to protect my country, people, and community; if needed, I would gladly sacrifice myself for the survival of my people.

B. This quote can relate to Omelas: The Ones who Walk Away, where the people of Omelas live in a utopian society, only possible due to the suffering of a child. The alien presence to the native people of Nibiru would ruin their culture, so Spock believes in sacrificing himself for the betterment of Nibiru. This is similar to the Omelas people allowing a child to be deprived of happiness for the continuation of Omelas.

C. This quote clearly aligns with utilitarianism, something often explored as favoring the majority at the expense of the few. There are many ethics across cultures and societies that favor this reasoning, allowing for an almost universal thinking.

3. “We identify virtuous people and then try to behave as they would behave. Kirk is acting in line with virtue ethics when he saves The Enterprise at the cost of his own life. He tells Spock, as he sits dying on the irradiated side of the glass, that he did it because that is what Spock would have done.”

A.  I can understand this reasoning, that people often strive to behave like those believed to be virtuous. I often try to behave like famous people who have done great wonders, such as Abraham Lincoln.

B. This can connect to Machiavelli’s story, The Prince, where he explains that being a virtuous leader is a terrible idea; he instead tries to persuade the audience to have a fake behavior and lie. Machiavelli connects these basic principles and attempts to apply it to unvirtuous or previously thought virtuous leaders of history.

C. This quote relates to the moral ethics of our society because it explains that we identify virtuous people and try to behave like them. Numerous people in history can be viewed as virtuous, and there are countless people to this day who strive to be them. In wartime or revolutions, people create martyrs or heroes that they believe represent virtue; creating many idolizers who attempt the same.

# data[].attributes.headline
Erik johnson reply #1 text-to-text-Pluto

# data[].attributes.subject
Erik johnson reply #1 text-to-text-Pluto

# data[].attributes.body
i can agree with what you said about the religion being open and thats what makes people happy in Omelas

# data[].attributes.body
I am replying because when we were reading Omelas and thinking now after the new story we read makes me go back and think if the kid is taken and you leave the people in Omelas with it destroyed will rebuild it and make it better just like the city that was made from past mistakes and wars

# data[].attributes.body
1. Text-to-Self
"... the right action depends upon our assessment of the consequences, we must know what the consequences of our actions will be." The problem with this line of reasoning, as pointed out by the text, is that this is not possible. You cannot always predict what will happen if, in my connection, you give money to people on the street. It is rare enough that someone actually does this, and may or may not be rarer still that the person puts that money to good use. The person could be a liar running a scam, or a druggie that will use the money to feed their addiction. This is why it is generally advised to just give food to someone on the street rather than money; you just never know for sure.
2. Text-to-Text
"... the ends justify the means. It does not matter how you do it, as long as you increase the net utility." I feel that this quote (as well as the idea of utilitarianism in general) can be applied to much of the advice Machiavelli offers to rulers in 'The Prince.' A ruler's job is to efficiently and effectively lead their state, and every action they take should be in the best interest of the state, regardless of the moral implications. According to 'The Greatest Happiness Principle' however, the moral implications should always be considered, and this is perhaps the greatest contrast between the texts.
3. Text-to-World
"Utilitarianism was the first moral philosophy to give a significant place to nonhuman animals." This line follows another that mentions how utilitarianism can be applied to anything with the capacity to suffer. The connection I could draw with the world was the question of what degree of suffering is taken into consideration? Where is the line meant to be drawn? A pig has more of an emotional capacity than a chicken but they can both receive about the same treatment in a slaughterhouse. Even though the philosophy can be applied to nonhuman animals, it generally isn't because philosophy is a concept only known TO humans, who are in control.

# data[].attributes.body
Question #4: Is ignorance or knowledge valued more? Is knowledge seen as dangerous or subversive?

Text to Self: I think that if I were a child in Omelas it would definitely be difficult to learn of what they do to an innocent child, especially if I knew them prior to that, but also it would be difficult to make the decision of leaving because of the great unknown, and an even greater challenge to stay and try to make changes because of everyone else’s support to authority due to their families and children being safe and happy because of that child’s suffering.

Text to Text: When considering Omelas, there is great value in knowledge, specifically of the child in the basement, which causes all the people to be grateful that they are able to have fulfillment because of that child, and it makes them more caring for their children. When considering Um-Helat, there is also an importance for knowledge because although knowing of all the bad things of our world would lead those in Um-Helat away from happiness, it would encourage them to stay and fight for improvement in the system which they live in, as well as taking responsibility for it. Ultimately, in both texts knowledge holds great value because it is crucial the people’s choice to leave Omelas from guilt, or fight for change in Um-Helat.

Text to World: When comparing our current world to Omelas and Um-Helat, the level of knowledge or influence heavily influences everyone. It’s shown in Those Who Walk Away From Omelas, by the author’s commentary on our society that we should question our selfishness, and how it has affected our societal systems and structure. Furthermore, in The Ones Who Stay and Fight, the speaker states how the people of Um-Helat would be living in a perfect world if it wasn’t for the evil things that came from our world, but have become normal to us, like racism and sexism being called “natural instinct”.

Question #5: How is Stability defined? What is sacrificed in order to achieve it?

Text to Self: I think it’s really interesting the way that Omelas shows stability through acceptance of a child’s constant sacrifice because it really makes us put into perspective our level of selfishness/selflessness, and how far we are willing to go in order to achieve “happiness” and fulfillment for ourselves and loved ones. Also, the way that Um-Helat doesn’t have a group of people who do nothing about injustices, because they always take responsibility and are willing to stay and make changes.

Text to Text: Stability in Omelas would be defined by one’s ability to accept the sacrifice made by an innocent child because it is already described as having everything that would make people happy, including a house, family, etc. In Um-Helat, the definition of stability is widely varied because the knowledge/influence from our world bring “evil” to them, forcing them to make a choice of fighting for change in the system they live in. Ultimately, Omelas has a clear definition of stability which involves the sacrifice of a child, causing them to deal with guilt, while Um-Helat doesn’t have a specific definition of stability.

Text to World: Similarly to Um-Helat, I think that the definition of stability isn’t one specific thing, but rather varies for everyone, because although certain sacrifices can be made in order to attempt to achieve it, there is always something new/different occurring in the world, and there is always a group of people who will have a different opinion on something, which is also why moral and ethical decisions aren’t set, but rather based on opinion.

Question #11: How much emphasis is placed on community or solidarity?

Text to Self: This question reminds me of the first few times when we talked about morals and ethics in class because when we talked about decision making, one of the first things to consider was the overall impact of our decisions on ourselves and the community as a whole. It very much ties back to both stories because in Omelas, there are people who value their own/communities’ happiness over the sacrifice of a child because it’ll contribute more to the “greater good”.

Text to Text: In Omelas, emphasis is placed on solidarity when stating that at a certain age, children have to learn about the child in the basement, which leads them to make a choice of staying or leaving Omelas. Then, emphasis is placed on the community when those who stay agree to keep the child in those conditions in order to maintain their happiness. On the other hand, in Um-Helat, when people look into the things of our world, they see the “evil” things, and are contaminated with it, then leading to the automatic choice of staying and fighting for change together, showing emphasis on community.

Text to World: I think that both texts are able to capture influence/decision making in the real world because they don't only show the way that our own actions have effects, but also the way that as a group, we can have an impact. Additionally, the way that the people of Um-Helat are willing to stay and fight for justice and equality, is able to encourage us that if we are able to work together we can also achieve change.

# data[].attributes.body
(a) I chose to respond to this post because I also chose this one, but we used different questions and I wanted to read a different perspective.
(b) I really like the wording you used on all of your explanations because it's clear and detailed. I can also relate to the parental pressure to follow similar ideologies, and I know it's very difficult to deal with especially when it has a heavy influence on your culture. I also think your take on text to text (for question 12) is really interesting because I hand't really thought of the role of religion in these settings.
(c) The only thing you could add would probably be more modern day examples because your explanations and examples that you have written are really good already.

# data[].attributes.body
(a) I chose to respond to this because it looked interesting and I think your good at analyzing things, so I knew it would be well done.
(b) I like how you related your personal experience to the allegory of the cave because it's interesting how your transition of reading genres is connected to a young age group. I also think your explanation of the group who will be oppressed is interesting because it's very true.
(c) Adding onto your points, I agree that there is always a group being oppressed, and it can be proven by the way it's still occurring today, whether its by exploited workers, or minorities experiencing injustice.

# data[].attributes.body
(a) I chose to respond to this post because of the texts we read in class, this was one of my favorites, and I know Ruby writes really well.
(b) Your examples are really well written, and are very effective with your explanations. I love how in your first personal example you mentioned how although you may have contributed negatively, you contributed positively by encouraging others to recycle. Also, your text to world example is great, and I love how you chose a more current example, because it allows for the use of prior knowledge from the reader.
(c) I definitely agree with your example of minority groups experiencing injustice, and that ignorance is considered bliss because it feels better to not know you did something wrong. I think that this is because having to accept our wrongs then gives the responsibility of doing something about it or having to deal with the fact that we could have done something and chose not to.

# data[].attributes.headline
Questions 2: How is happiness defined in the society.

# data[].attributes.subject
Questions 2: How is happiness defined in the society.

# data[].attributes.body
Q2 Text to Self: Happiness is defined within Omelas as easy access to pleasure, and the safety/stability of everything to do with the city. Although the people make up the heart of the city, Omelas is a representation of the closest thing to a utopia. Everything is the best it can be within Omelas besides morals. The happiness of this utopia relies on the suffering of one small child, in a way you could say happiness is defined through the child, or therefore the lack of care for the child. I find a personal connection to Omelas because even within our society of the U.S., we to have sacrifices that we choose to make for the chosen. The poor, unfortunate, minorities within our society who mostly go uncared for are sacrificed for the chosen.

Q2 Text to Text: Omelas directly applies to general ideas on utilitarian thinking by sacrificing the few for the betterment of the many. Whether people in this city are thinking utilitarianism is up for debate, yet still this principle applies to the people of Omelas day to day lives.

Q2 Text to World: The child symbolizes the unfortunate in all parts of the world not just the U.S. The young children working in sweatshops to make our clothes, the children who are forced to go to war, or the children who are forced to work instead of going to school. Whether planned or not these kids are ultimately sacrifices for the pleasure of many.

# data[].attributes.body
3 Text to Self: I agree with many principles of utilitarian thinking, and I even agree that the best outcome of the situation is to kill the man suffering. Yet I cannot condone the infanticide, I have a personal connection to this when me and my brother were arguing about abortion. He claimed  there are some conditions in this world a child should never be brought up in, I said that although some may have a horrible childhood it is not right to take away all the potential experiences a human being can have. Tying to utilitarianism ideas to this you could say that no matter what environment the child was brought up in, there is still potential for them to have net pleasure throughout their lifetime.

3 Text to Text: This passage almost directly connects to Omelas. The abortion argument I had can be contradicted by the boy in the closet, if someone lived in these conditions they likely have no potential to increase their net happiness, yet it is not realistic to assume someone could live like this their whole lives.

3 Text to World: You could compare examples of utilitarian reasoning to the Allegory of the Cave through my abortion argument. One prisoner of the cave was released and when he was released he was confused at first, yet experienced possibly the greatest pleasure he's ever known through learning the truth of the world. The same can be said for a kid who has a bad childhood, once they become an adult they could be enlightened to the true beauty of the world.

# data[].attributes.body
1. While one might not be able to change it, one must stay engaged in one’s community and fight for change .

I am a junior class officer and since juniors help plan prom , us juniors were able to help pick the place for us to have prom. Us juniors had talked with teachers who had been planning it prior to us who originally had wanted it to be here at school and if that had been the case no one would have enjoyed it  but with help of our advisor we were able to do it somewhere that was not at our school. Had other juniors and myself not been a part of the planning our ideas would not have been out there helping but because we are a part of it we were able to activate for our juniors and seniors so we could have a good prom.

This text relates to omelas because someone in each story is on the lower side of things/ less fortunate. In both texts the community understands that because of the less fortunate and people at the bottom are why they live life so well and without problems.

A real life connection is like people who are involved in politics , people who are part of things like that do it so they can advocate for themselves and things they believe are better for our communities. Because they stay engaged they fight for the things they believe are good.

1. But change in Jemisin’s story comes not through a rejection and a walking away, but through the care of one’s community and becoming an integral part of its protection.

Change happens all the time like us coming into this new school year, some precautions were taken  more seriously when it came to our and the schools safety. But this didn't happen just because. It happened because  tragic events regarding school safety often occur. And they were put into effect to help protect our community.

Change occurred in omelas but in a different way than in the ones who stay in fight because once people decided that their kids were able to see the kid who suffered so that they lived well , they obviously changed the way they thought but no one could do anything about it because then their life would be bad. But the change in the ones who stay and fight was like you did something well your punished and now you will suffer consequences by helping this community that did something very bad to you.

Relating this to real world problems is like when we get a new president, change happens because it's a new person but it's change to better our world or at least thats what its supposed to be. But they change things based on what's best for our world.

3. Jemisin’s story shows us how to care for the future. It is an imperfect process. It is a process that does not, and cannot, avoid harm for all.

I think us as human beings do things that benefit us and its a normal thing to want to do things that are beneficial to ourselves and even though its a normal thing people do, sometimes along the way people do get hurt or atleast aren't benefited as well.

In omelas a child was harmed but it was inevitable for them that someone had to live the unfortunate life for the others to have a good life.

This happens all the time in real life , because not everyone will be able to be pleased at the same time. Like when it comes to school some people would rather go earlier to get out earlier but we start later and get out later because there is also benefits of going to school later.

# data[].attributes.body
1a)"The balance of an action’s good and bad results." It’s agreeable to have my belief that there can be good without the balance of bad, or you can have something bad happen without a possible good outcome.

2a)Relating to Omelas it's a prime example of the quote. Their happiness balances out with the one child who must suffer, just so they can live in this place where everything is perfect.The Ones who stay and fight, It is an opposite opinion of the quote. The world that Um-Helat states that we can have the same happiness and more but we don't need the balance of badness to give us this, and furthermore state that we would usually be expecting to want a bad to make the balance even.

3a)In the real world we really do deal with the people who suffer so others can be happy. That there could be no happiness without suffering, for example if you are choosing ice cream for yourself, the utilitarian view is that you should choose the flavor that will give you the most pleasure. If you enjoy chocolate but hate vanilla, you should choose chocolate for the pleasure it will bring and avoid vanilla because it will bring displeasure.

# data[].attributes.body
1. "Question 2. How is happiness defined in society?"
Text -To-Self
Happiness in a society is based on the happiness of the people in the society. What does happiness mean to me as a n individual living in a society? Happiness to me is an emotion, its something you feel when you get a good grade or get new clothes when you see a family member you miss, or go on vacation, All the things I have mentioned are just moments and fragments of life, this is the same way I feel about happiness. It's just a temporary feeling that doesn't last forever, to strive for a happy life is impossible because you are bound to feel sad at some point. In society, happiness is like a marketing tool they try to sell it to you through jobs, products, food, sex, and countless other things the goal is to be happy even though you and I know that that can never be possible.

Text-to-Text
"They were not simple folk, you see, though they were happy. But we do not say the words of cheer much anymore. All smiles have become archaic." This quote describes happiness in omelas as a different type of thing. The quote says that their smiles became archaic meaning old fashioned or no longer in everyday use meaning though they are happy they are not smiling. I believe happiness in omelas it the same in our society and it is seen more as contentment of fulfillment rather than an expression or emotion. The only difference is that the people of omelas have actually reached this definition of happiness and in our society, it can only be a dream.

Text-to-world
Similar to what is said in the text-to-text paragraph this idea of happiness is the same in omelas and in our real society the only thing differentiating it is the fact that the people of omelas have finally reached contentment and fulfillment.

# data[].attributes.body
Text to self: "Don’t rely on inspiration. You have to rely on habit. Habit is more useful when you’re actually trying to get work done on deadline."
While this quote might appear self explanatory, I find it very igniting.  I can speak on my dreams and goals and preach about what it is i want to accomplish, although without tackling adversity and applying work ethic and routine , nothing will truly be accomplished, and Habits are what makes an individual. Meaning only I have control over effective habits.

Text to text: "With Le Guin's story, at the end of it, she's suggesting that the only way to create a society that is a better place is to walk away from this one or to go off the grid." - This quote truly deepens my thinking. "go off the grid" sounds intimidating although very promising. But can one live happily off the grids, in our generation more specifically? more than likely not, narrowing down our options. It's almost inevitable,  There is suffering and sacrifice everywhere no matter where you go.  While  in contrast , "The ones who stay and fight"  focuses on creating a better world instead of leaving to find one, they are likely more  aware that there is only one  true option, that being to promote change and fight.

Text to world: "That is what we’ve been struggling with, people who are so fragile that they’re literally willing to destroy the planet rather than give up controlling it. "
A real world connection that came to mind after reading this quote  was the current environmental stance of our planet. More specifically the causes resulting in our planets sustainability dramatically decreasing. Money, wealth, and our economic progression has over ruled our own planet and increased environmental issues  to a concerning point. Thinking more utilitarian, the ignorance of our people  blind to  our carbon footprint and overall environmental impact is similar to Allegory Of the cave. The people who believe our planet is good for another million years are ignorant to the statistics and research showing our world is deteriorating and they are blind  to the knowledge that could positively impact our planet.

# data[].attributes.headline
 REPLY #1 - Jaylin Perez reply to Brisha 

# data[].attributes.subject
 REPLY #1 - Jaylin Perez reply to Brisha 

# data[].attributes.body
A- Brisha, I am choosing to reply to your text to self because I too strongly relate to being very drawn to a few specific genres in reading. Your response interested me because fantasy was one of  my personal favorites when I was younger. I do agree with your comparison to allegory of the cave, cause I too was ignorant to different genres the same way the people were ignorant to knowledge.
B- I do wonder, What sparked your interest in other genres, or any specific books?
C-I think you should be proud that you stepped out of your comfort zone, but don't ever feel discouraged to be a kid once more and open a fantasy again! Keep your creative juices flowing.

# data[].attributes.headline
REPLY #2- Jaylin Perez reply to Erik johnson 

# data[].attributes.subject
REPLY #2- Jaylin Perez reply to Erik johnson 

# data[].attributes.body
A- Erik , I am choosing to reply to your text to self because  I was  interested in your perspective. It comes off very encouraging. I too agree that desire is a mentality that can overcome all adversity. When an individual is doing something out of their own desire, their true morals are exposed.

B-I do wonder, Has desire been an asset to success during your lifetime, have your desires steered your life into a direction that you are content with?

C- I think you should continue to advocate for this stance, it's encouraging and makes me personally alter how I approach my goals in life.

# data[].attributes.headline
REPLY #3- Jaylin Perez reply to cora Lacross

# data[].attributes.subject
REPLY #3- Jaylin Perez reply to cora Lacross

# data[].attributes.body
A- Cora , I am choosing to reply to your text to self because  I was  interested in the huge transition you took on and how that might affect you. I too agree that all religions don’t apply to everyone and every individual percepts life differently. What one considers sacred , others may not.

B- I do wonder, How do you feel after staying true to your beliefs, do you feel a sense of freedom? Positive or negative, im genuinely curious

C- I think you should share your ideas and your perspectives with others in similar situations. There are many cases of children following their parents' beliefs out of their parents' desires although they might be very unknowledgeable of the true broad way of thinking and might want to make changes in their lives too.

# data[].attributes.body
Text to Self - "In other words, according to utilitarianism, the ends justify the means. It does not matter how you do it, as long as you increase the net utility." My personal connection to this quote is that I have seen a lot of characters have this mentally when they decide to do things. I feel as if sometimes the ends justify the means, but this cannot be the case every single time.

Text to Text - "And it is true that we never know absolutely what will happen as a consequence of our action." In the city of Omelas, everyone is afraid of freeing the child because they all think that if they do, their perfect society will begin to fall, but they do not truly know this will happen. This is just what they are told.

Text to World - "Similarly, given the choice of granting or denying her request for a loan, we would usually maximize utility by granting her request. However, if she will probably use the money to buy drugs, become intoxicated and then beat her children, we should deny her request." Sadly, this is a thing that happens in the world. People will abuse kindness and good fortune and give in to their disgusting desires. This is where Utilitarianism can have its problems. While it should be bringing happiness for doing a good thing, the very opposite can happen.

# data[].attributes.body
“He doesn’t know why his life is the way it is.” in our course of life, its full of endless possibilities you may question and wonder. Having to go through something that you have no control over is something that i can relate to and understand because i often think to myself why its me that has to go through so many conflicting things. In The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas there's a certain part in the story where the child says “Please let me out. I will be good!” Clearly he doesn't understand the reason why things are happening to him. Why he's locked in the cellar, why people are looking at him, why he's treated so horribly. In our society there are things we have absolutely no control over. There are so many unfair things going on in the world and having choices made for us like decisions hurting the planet. We as the helpless people we are are will ask and ask ourselves, why do they do this, why cant we have a stronger say in things. In our real world all types of people will definitely ask why life is the way it is. Why is the world the way it is? Why do we live like this? Specifically, lower class people that are regularly treated horribly have definitely had the thought of “why are others so much more important”.

“what do you do when you find out peace and prosperity are built on intense suffering?” A relation i have to this quote involves school. Its like the way i find peace is by acidemic validation, but at what cost? My mental health? My ability to do other activities? I have to sacrifice being able to do things that I want to do in order to turn in my work that half the time, isn't even on time. I do know that it’s my fault for the suffering, but getting my work in at least and getting a neat grade is a good feeling. I simply have to accept that fact. In The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas they feel “disgust, anger and outrage”. There’s nothing they can simply do though. Like me, they must accept the fact that there's nothing that can be done to stop it. In our world we have always accepted it. Labor workers in factories is a geat example for this. They work and work and we dont have consideration for how we were able to receive such objects. How do the people working long hours in factories feel that we dont really pay attention to them. They deserve so much more than probably most of us not as important people.

“what happens when somebody decides to break that social contract rather than submit to it.”

As a text to self, text to text in The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, and text to world, everything will fall apart. I have agreed to something for one of my siblings in exchange for another thing, but what happens when i just decide to stop? It goes downhill because once i stop, so does their side of the agreement. Our system falls apart and just doesnt work anymore. The text says “if the child were brought up into the sunlight out of that vile place, if it were cleaned and fed and comforted, that would be a good thing, indeed; but if it were done, in that day and hour all the prosperity and beauty and delight of omelas would wither and be destroyed.” saying that their whole system will fall apart if one side of that agreement fails to submit. In our world, its like the government system. Our three branches, the separation of powers, what happens when one overpowers the other? It falls apart because we’re supposed to be on agreed terms.

# data[].attributes.body
4) Is ignorance or knowledge valued more? is knowledge seen as a dangerous or subversive?
text to self- similar questions wee given to us for the in allegory of the cave short questions in exam.
text to text-
the lack of knowledge by the people in the cave doesnt directly effect them in the allegory of  the cave as thye hav e no previous preception of reality and do not know what is outside of their world so when philisophers who were once more enlightened when  exposed to this world try to expose these ideas towards these people - because of the belief that danger is upon that group as they have no knowledge- their success is little to none and both groups have a negative connotoation of eachothers attempts and unattempts of learning.
text to world-
in the allegory of the cave the whole process in which the freed poisoner experienced once expose to the world outside of the cave was much an experience like the real world and its implementation of further realities. The whole idea of being initially uncomfortable to the light and later adjusting to it but in that adjustment the prisoner is able to see further than known relates to real life as seen in religion the whole idea of god and higher powers if not already believed is hard to come to, but once that belief is constituted to your ideas the whole perception of religion changes later being able to accept Christ ect.
16.what roles do history and the past play in the textx?
text-self - history is a major part of the improvemnt in society by a series of riots etc, like i have learned in us hihstory
text to text-
Um-Helat in jemesins stotry exists in another dimension, and is our world perfected after much struggle. the history and the past was hidden by the certain people to not corrupt the mind of the poeeple but once some of the citizens of Um-Helat have discovered a way to observe our world, and our hate and beliefs in inequality are corrupting theirs Some of the citizens of Um-Helat have come up with a solution to this problem. They don’t walk away. They seek out and kill those citizens that are spreading corruption from our world..
text ton world- the whole previous idea of jemesisns sstory and hw certain people brushed their history to the side and tried to froget about it shows that the only tru evolution for a society is through phyically looking back at their wrongs and learning from it... once people try to blow it under the ground histroy is bound to repeat it self if not something worse.
3.what is the status?...
text-self
leaning about technelogical advancemts in us history reminds me a lot of this question
text-tect
in the article um Helat has pioneered technology that allows them to see in to other worlds, in particular our world as well as there are mentions of adaptive equipment for anyone with physical disabilities meaning that technology is a highly used product in um helat which leads to the incorporation of jobs etc. technology is what forms both good and bad part of um helat, either death or diversity by either spectrum.
text-worlds
like in the ones who walk away technology advancemnt have pioneered society and economically bosted socities throughout history, such as industrialisation in the us and the rising of job and wages, leading to the reconstruction of societies. Such technologies when they have positives there are negatives just like in jemesins story that being that pollution, and or world envolvent and the catostrophic events that can happen with such technoloogiss.

# data[].attributes.body
text to self- to me i think happiness is based on mentality. because i used to always think people who were wealthy were the happiest alive because they had money, but my mom would always tell me that someone could be so rich, but so miserable. just like the saying "money doesnt buy happiness." and i do truly believe that, you could be stuck up and rich and be angry with world or yourself and overall not happy. compared to someone who isn't stuck up but rather so kind, with no money, i think its all mentally. text to text- basing it off mentality, i think i could connect this to the allegory of the cave because in their mindset they didn't believe of the unknown or much rather kind of thought poorly of it if that makes sense, and how can you be happy with a negatively set poor mindset? text to world- back to kind of what i first said but it's based on mentality like someone being wealthy but having a poor mindset and not being happy, or maybe even someone struggling mentally. of course they're not going to be happy if their struggling that's what i feel like is common today or mostly heard about. - lauren delgado question 2

# data[].attributes.body
1.  “To reject one’s culpability in the system and live separately from that which ultimately benefits us.”

a. To me this quote is talking about greed and how some people would just prefer to give up on the situation so that they can avoid the consequences. By saying that it would benefit an individual is true and false because in the moment you would get to avoid the consequences of the group action but would now forever live with the guilt. Something that comes to mind with this situation would be like a stunt in dance, which requires all the members. In a stunt it can be easy to pinpoint the blame on one person for messing up and remove yourself from the blame, but in reality it was a group effort.
b. This can relate to The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas, as the people believe that by leaving they can avoid the consequences. The people that end up leaving Omelas attempt to remove the blame from themselves of the child’s suffering by walking away thinking it will benefit them as they are no longer directly hurting the child. However, this is no good either as not enough people are walking away to manifest a change.
c. This can be seen in the real world in any system that has a set of leaders or officer positions. Mistakes sometimes happen and the blame will fall on everyone that makes up the cabinet. Some people that don’t want to make themselves look bad will simply decide to resign or walk away before they have to acknowledge and suffer the consequences of their actions. They may think that they are free from this mistake but in reality everyone knows the reason that you walked away so you may benefit for a moment but not all the time.

2. “The girl, rather than being locked powerless in a closet, is given agency to address that which harmed her by fighting against its root cause.”
a. The way I can connect with this is with any student government position that I have held throughout my high school career. Instead of being quiet and not voicing my opinion I was given the opportunity to join a leadership team where I am guided to help make school a better environment for everyone. As a woman some people can still tend to look down upon us but with the confidence and skills I have gained it has made me a better person and leader.
b. This directly connects to both The Ones Who Stay and Fight, and The Ones who Walk Away from Omelas. It  connects to the first one as the girl in the story is one that is given the guidance and power to be able to fight giants and the unfairness that takes place in this world. It also connects to the Omelas setting but in an inverse manner, the child in this story is locked up and has no power to fight against change of the society.
c. In the real world setting this can connect to any female figure or leader that has fought for change in society. Some examples could be Michelle Obama or Kamala Harris, who weren't afraid to stand up for what they believe in and helped influence the country to do so as well. They didn’t allow themselves to be powerless but instead powerful and allowed themselves to gain guidance for what they wanted to accomplish.

3.  But working toward the holistic justice of engaged community and relationship as a way to care for the future is humanity’s best hope.
a. To me this signifies that in order to be able to keep surviving in this world we are all going to have to do our part and join together in an active community. I can make a personal connection to this with being on Diamond Line, it takes everyone putting in the world and having unity within one another to be able to be successful as a team. If even one team member isn't fully committed to that practice or that competition it can mess up the relationship and cohesiveness of the team. It is our best hope and in our best interest to build that strong foundation with each other to be able to succeed in the future.
b. This can connect to The Ones Who Stay and Fight in a way that the whole community needs to be able to step it up and fight for change if they want any hope for success in the future. In order to fight for change you need to be the change by staying put in Um Helat and believing in what is right to save children from having to go through the same pain that the girl did. c. A real world example of this could be a school setting where all of the teachers, administrators, and students will have different opinions but if they want to have an enjoyable environment compromises must be made. The community and relationships between students and teachers needs to be a cohesive one so that they are able to both voice their opinions.

# data[].attributes.body
4. Is ignorance or knowledge valued more? Is knowledge seen as dangerous or subversive?
Text-To-Self
I have always been a curious person and loved conspiracy theories. Part of the reason I wanted to work in the government and political field is that I want to know things I thought others didn't know, I wanted to be a leader and have information the general public didn't have, now that I think about it it's kind of dumb but I was a kid so whatever, now that I am older I question if being left in the dark on a few things is actually beneficial to people rather than knowing everything. I think knowledge is valued more in society but can be dangerous depending on who you share your knowledge with. Some people say ignorance is bliss or that what you don't know can't hurt you. I believe that sayings like this are just excuses not to say the truth out of fear.

Text-To-Text
In the story when the members become a certain age they are shown a child in a little room " They all know it is there, all the people of omelas. Some of them have come to see it, others are content merely to know it is there." that has to suffer for the society to still be a paradise "The child used to scream for help at night, ad cry a good deal, but now it only makes a kind of whining,". They then have the choice to stay in society or leave it behind, though if they choose to leave the boy still has to suffer the same amount. Ignorance is not a choice in omelas "They all know it is there," Knowledge is valued more in society, it might be the thing that keeps the society afloat. Some may say it is better for them to not know so they can live happily and not know of his suffering but his suffering and their knowledge of it is what makes them them. The people that stayed all have something in common, they feel no guilt and if there is no guilt then there are no guilty people.

Text-To-World
This connects to the world because the people of the world value knowledge the same as the people of omelas. Ideally the world would have people that are on the same level of knowledge, this could eliminate racism, sexism, colorism, and loads of other stuff. Overall ignorance is more dangerous than knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
6. How is freedom treated
Text-To-Self
Freedom for me growing up in a strict African home is very limited. Freedom is treated as rebellion for children and as a parent the more freedom you give your child the worse of a parent that you are.  Freedom for me means having options and opportunities, it means being able to have a say in the matters of your life without fear, judgment, or retaliation.

Text-To-Self
In the city of omelas freedom is treated as        priority, it is all about having the choice to do what you want and doing it "If an orgy would help, don't hesitate.", "For those who like it, the faint insistent sweetness of drooz may perfume the ways of the city,", and "For more modest tastes I think there ought to be beer.". The people of omelas have the freedom to do whatever they want they are free of guilt for anything that does "I know there is none of in Omelas is guilt.". Making them free of their own emotions, they have no moral compass, well not like what we have in our society, freedom to the people of Omelas if eternal they even have the freedom to leave if they like "They keep walking, and walk straight out of the city of Omelas, through the beautiful gates.".

Text-To-World
The people of the world treat freedom as a privildge it is limited in our soiety even though it is a right. Not everyone in our society has freedom even though we should.

# data[].attributes.headline
Vivien Saliuokeola response #1 to Eva Moore

# data[].attributes.subject
Vivien Saliuokeola response #1 to Eva Moore

# data[].attributes.body
I can relate to always sticking to the same types of books, I just recently started reading books outside of my regular which were graphic novels. Allegory of the cave was a great example of being stuck in our ways as people some of us willingly choose blindness even though light always seems like the best option.

# data[].attributes.body
I can see how this quote relates to Omelas and the real world. Good can't exist without even the smallest amount of bad even if the place is "perfect" like Omelas. The world is filled with people suffering even though it may not be benefiting us directly like in Omelas it is still a part of our society.

# data[].attributes.body
I relate to Maya's view that change doesn't happen immediately but we as people can always strive for better in our world.

# data[].attributes.body
1. But rather than remain in isolation, as in “Omelas,” Jemisin’s child is cared for ⁠— and ultimately educated to become a part of the community mechanism which preserves utopia in Um-Helat.

a.  I failed one of my midterms and my family decided to take away my laptop just like the girl's dad was killed for spreading the ideology. As the society educated and brain washed the girl into become a social worker, my family decided to educate me the importance of success rather than failing.

b. Machiavelli's philosophy states how a prince should 'educate' his army and rather what benefits the enemy, harms him; and what benefits him, harm the enemy. Whoever is more vigilant in observing the designs of the enemy in war, and endures much hardship in training his army, will incur fewer dangers, and can have greater hope for victory preserving the mechanism of Um-Helat.

c. As of 2020, it was estimated that Chinese authorities may have detained up to 1.8 million people, mostly Uyghurs but also including Kazakhs, Kyrgyz and other ethnic Turkic Muslims, Christians, as well as some foreign citizens including Kazakhstanis, in these secretive internment camps located throughout the region. As compared to Um-Helat, these camps detain people like the little child to turn them into one of them for thinking, acting and behaving in society.

2. " To reject one’s culpability in the system and live separately from that which ultimately benefits us. "

a. I constantly try to reject the faults of my family and live away from it. The other day, I did not let my mother toxicity of comparing me to other kids bother me at all. It benefited me with the mental calmness and not making me feel not good enough.

b. Machiavelli tells the new princes to ignore what people think about them. He has to be feared rather that being love for their own benefit to rule a kingdom wisely and strongly.

c. Even tho the government banned gay marriage, gays ignore the government and hate for their own health relationship which ultimately benefits them to live merely.

3. Climate change will affect future generations more than most people alive today.

a. Living in Texas, I already experience climate change everyday. Currently it should be spring, but rather temperature drops down to freezing. Few days ago, hail damaged my car and left a dent on it hence I think the climate change will get worse and affect the future people more.

b. Plato’s cave allegory symbolizes ignorance and superficial reality, but also the importance of education and acquiring wisdom. For those who are ready to leave the cave and enter the sunlight, there are helpful resources available from NASA, Project Drawdown, UNFCC, GreenBiz, Climate changed, Nature, New Scientist, inspiring movies and countless apps that help free the chains and start your journey towards the sun.

c.  In Plato’s cave prisoners are chained, head fixed so they only see shadows projected on the wall in front of them. To the prisoners the shadows on the wall are reality. Artists and demagogues project shadows, at best to lift human spirits, at worst to control them. Our modern equivalent is the media where climate denial gets as much attention as climate facts. Politicians, corporations and industry lobby groups do their best to convince people that humanity’s impact on climate is negligible and project shadows accordingly on the wall. The International Monetary Fund estimated that in 2015 the fossil fuel industry received more than $5.3 trillion in direct and indirect subsidies, about 6.5% of global GDP. In 2013, $53 billion went to livestock subsidies in 35 OECD countries. Two sad results of the masters of shadows.