In Ursula LeGuins short story The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,

In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,” everyone in the city of Omelas is happy—everyone, that is, except the child who is kept locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end, most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian morality.

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining right and wrong. For utilitarians, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore, utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant because only the consequences determine how much happiness is produced.

Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good” philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality. First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything—or, more importantly, anyone—can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.

1. Which of the following best sums up the author’s opinion of utilitarianism?

a. It is an ethical theory.
b. It is the ethical theory that people should all live by.
c. It is a useful but problematic ethical theory.
d. It does not adequately measure happiness.
e. It underestimates the intrinsic value of human beings.

2. According to the passage, in utilitarianism

a. only intentions have moral significance.
b. consequences are important, but intentions are more important.
c. intentions and consequences are equally important.
d. intentions are important, but consequences are more important.
e. only consequences have moral significance.

3. The author summarizes LeGuin’s story primarily to

a. show how good the story is.
b. get readers interested in the story.
c. illustrate the power of words.
d. illustrate the central problem with utilitarianism.
e. illustrate a utilitarian utopia.

4. From the passage, it can be inferred that the author

a. may use utilitarianism occasionally but not as a guiding moral principle.
b. would never use utilitarianism to make a decision about what is right or wrong.
c. uses utilitarianism regularly to make moral decisions.
d. believes utilitarianism is a good basis for social policy.
e. thinks most people do not really understand utilitarianism.

5. From the author’s summary of LeGuin’s story, the reader can infer that

a. most people in Omelas are utilitarians.
b. most people in Omelas reject utilitarianism.
c. everyone in Omelas is happy.
d. the child willingly sacrifices himself for others.
e. LeGuin is a popular science-fiction writer.