Individuals in the public eye strive to discover happiness in themselves, others, and their environment. What factors are there to achieve extreme satisfaction in one's life? What moral choices must be defeated to acquire this incomparable satisfaction that every individual strives for? The inhabitants of Omelas have difficulty achieving the goal of opting for the moral choice of privilege. In exchange for their happiness and ultimate success, there is the desperation of a child. In order to live a “flawless” life, the inhabitants of Omelas must recognize the child's resistance. Settling on the privilege of moral choice is problematic, but important to ending foul play by the general public. The negligence in resolving moral issues in the city of Omelas is shown through three distinct characters in the story. There are the people who ignore the situation, the people who look at the child with unhappiness, and the people who think they should leave. In the story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” the characters neglect to resolve the moral questions of their general audience, and the reader is shown the meaning of a good obligation and the ramifications of the troublesome errand of deciding on the moral choice of privilege. no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay In "Those Who Walk Away From Omelas" those who are ignorant and unaware are responsible for neglecting to strike the best possible moral choice in the general public of Omelas. Every native of Omelas is expected to realize that there is a child without hope for the satisfaction of the general populace. People who are "happy just to realize it's there" are those who explicitly overlook the issue and are content to carry on with their ideal happy life realizing that a young person is hopeless in exchange for their happiness. It is recognized that if you do not attempt to consider ethics and think through a response to a problem in the public arena, the problems will go away without anyone else. Being insensitive to problems in the public eye is seen as the answer to solving them. The population that appears in the city of Omelas realizes that the child is there and does not ask themselves how to solve the problem, considering individual happiness, the satisfaction of others and the joy of the child. This places them in the position of spectators of the problem. Everyone realizes it must be there. Some of them understand why, some don't, but they all understand that their happiness...is completely dependent on the desperation of the current guy." Individual happiness comes as a need for those of Omelas, regardless of whether it is in exchange for misery of a little boy. This is a moral dilemma that the natives neglect to defeat appropriately. They overcome this problem by neglecting the circumstance and trying to solve the problem without anyone else. Essentially recognizing that the boy is there in misery is a prerequisite for living a Olmelas. Neglecting the circumstance is a person's choice, which ultimately makes the problem worse than before. Moral duty and appropriate moral choices are not taken into consideration, and make the general public distracted and neglect the huge issue of the child who resists greatly so that the inhabitants of Omelas can move forward with their "immaculate" life. In the city of Omelas, there are those who neglect, but there are also natives who look at the child with sadness. The people who visit the child just to watch and observe the child in his misery also decide not to concern themselves with the matter andthey act as observers of a wrongdoing in the public arena. Some actually participated in the torment and kicked the young man to make him hold on. The others have never come close, but they scrutinize him with nervous and nauseated eyes.' The general population who comes to watch participates in the activities that put the young person in agony by carrying on the activity and even sharing in the beating of the child. They are creating a belief system that it is a standard in the eyes of the public to visit the child to understand the problem, but do nothing to solve it. These young spectators are constantly stunned and disgusted by the sight. They feel nauseated, which they were more aware of. They feel indignation, shock and ineptitude, despite the considerable number of clarifications. The general population who come to look at the child and are stunned to see the young man and the agony and misery he is in. Then why should the general population of Omelas go to see the child, and still do not make an effort to discover a target for the serious problem in the public arena. Natives need recognition to see that what they have been taught is actually self-evident. However, when they discover the young man's repugnances in the basement, they are unaware of the situation and yet "go home in tears or in tearless fury." The agreement that is by all accounts the "rule" of life in the public arena is, after watching and visiting the young man, the citizens' tears for the unpleasant injustice drying up when they begin to see the horrible fairness of the world real, and to recognize it." When society recognizes the bad quality of their city, they become observers of the situation and become delusions to correct the imbalance of their audience. Here and there, after seeing the child in agony and despair, people "do not go home sobbing or fuming, [they don't], in fact they go home by any stretch of the imagination." There are those who leave Omelas totally distressed and bewildered. The burden of the bad form of society develops on these individuals to the point where they can no longer be part of the general public that gives them the most happiness. Although it may seem that this is the most ideal approach for conquer the moral choice of satisfaction. Is it extremely reasonable to leave the only problem in the network and abandon it? Some will say that the one who leaves is the one who deserves the ultimate satisfaction that Omelas brings to the table find an answer to the problem. They leave the impeccable city of Omelas with the knowledge that there is nothing they can do to solve the matter, so the basic agreement is obviously to leave and leave the joy and betrayal behind. they don't come back. Where they are headed is a place even less conceivable to most of us in the city of satisfaction.' From time to time, the main practical response to society's foul play is to withdraw from society and leave behind the issues that were so difficult to understand. Those who overlook, those who watch, and those who walk away are characters in the story who neglect to address the moral issues of their general audience. These characters can be found as a general rule and can be contrasted with the characters of natives all over the world. The consequences of individual joy are the work of a child or someone who is not sufficiently paid in cash in a Third World country. Unlike the general public of Omelas, where the joy of many is in exchange for the resistance of one young man, the similarities are solid. Natives all over the world actually neglect to address the moral issue/10.1177/097168580401000209)