In The Lathe of Heaven, Ursula K. Le Guin uses the unique power struggle between George Orr and Dr. Haber to assert that a single person cannot it is capable of dealing with all the negative aspects of a society. Many individuals would argue that those who have both power and altruistic intentions have the ability to improve society as a whole, but the consequences of Haber's actions show us otherwise. While one may sense that Dr. Haber means well, that he desires power solely to improve the world for all, he seems to completely overestimate the amount of good a single person can create. He continually applies his ideals of altruism to the unique situation in which Orr's effective dream has placed him, a situation in which normal logic does not apply. Haber sees Orr's dreams as a power to be controlled, but seems to forget that dreams are not entirely controllable: when Haber attempts to do so through hypnotic suggestions, Orr reminds him that he "does not choose" how to handle situations, but instead " follow[s]” (Le Guin 125). Therefore, Haber is not only flawed in his perception of power, but also in the methods through which an individual can exercise it. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay From the beginning, Haber has lived by the philosophy that the individual is responsible for creating significant change in society over the course of his or her career. We learned this early when he told Orr that “[a] person is defined solely by the extent of his influence on other people” and asserted that “morality is an absolutely meaningless term unless it is defined as the good that one does to others,” demonstrating his firm belief in the duty of the individual (Le Guin 53). Early in his relationship with Haber, Orr recognizes the negative results of Haber's logic, urging him to "[s]top using [his] dreams to make things better" because "[it's] wrong" (Le Guin 81) . But Haber, determined to use this power he has discovered as a means to improve the world, refuses to recognize the negative consequences of his actions, despite Orr's warnings. He believes that the ends justify the means and makes this clear to Orr when he asks if "man's very purpose on earth" is "to make things, to change things, to manage things, to create a better world?" (Le Guin 82). Haber's reluctance to accept Orr's warnings demonstrates his tendency to overestimate the power an individual should hold. He not only believes that an individual has the ability to bring about positive change for society at large, but that it is his or her duty to attempt it at all costs. Despite these intentions, many of his attempts to create a better life for all humans result in death, disorder, and devastating changes in society. Therefore, it would be logical to say that this goal is not achievable, no matter how altruistic the intentions, since any single person is not capable of improving everyone's lives at once. While it is true that Haber failed to see his vision come to fruition, one could argue that the reason Haber did not achieve his goal is not because it is impossible for someone to achieve it, but simply because the way he achieved it it was wrong. Haber himself attempts to affirm this when he deduces that “Orr's irresponsibility was the cause of the death of many innocent people” (Le Guin 118). In this Haber creates doubt by blaming Orr for what happened, which leads readers to an important consideration. Haber is creating chaos in his attempts to harness Orr's powersforever, or is Orr creating chaos by resisting Haber's attempts to use his dream effectively in a more controlled environment? Le Guin seems to place the blame on Haber, who comes to the conclusion that "[h]e had been too protective, too indulgent of Orr" (118) when Orr tells him about the effective, uncontrolled dream that led to the alien invasion, Eche ultimately it was Haber's carelessness that led to the chaos. Indeed, when Le Guin, from Haber's perspective, writes, “he must face what he has done,” (118) he does not make it clear who Haber is referring to. Are you telling us that Orr needs to admit that he is irresponsible enough to have an uncontrolled dream, or that he is the one who needs to deal with giving Orr the opportunity to do so? The fact that Le Guin leaves this thought up to the reader's interpretation implies that she is blaming both Orr and Haber for their contributions to the negative outcomes of the dream, however different those contributions may be. Where Haber contributes to the devastation by greedily using Orr's thinking effective dreams, Orr himself contributes his hesitation to allow Haber to control them. He is not convinced that Haber possesses the ability to play God by manipulating his dreams in hopes of creating a better world. He continually communicates this perspective to Haber, urging him to say that "[t]he world is, no matter how [they] think it should be" and that "[he] must [let] it be" (Le Guin 140). ). Haber argues that if you decide to leave things as they are, you are essentially deciding not to help people when you could. He compares the situation to dealing with a woman dying from a snake bite and asks Orr if he "[would] hold [the serum] because 'that's the way it is'" rather than save her life (Le Guin (140 ) Orr refuses to give him an answer, as he believes the two situations are not comparable. He later reflects that "the snakebite serum analogy was false" because it only involved two individuals (Le Guin 155 gets here). imply one of two things. We could argue that Orr refutes Haber's analogy because he doesn't want to take on the responsibility that his effective dreams have given him, however, it seems to me that there is more than just an unwillingness to wield power behind his. hesitation. When Le Guin writes that Orr believes that "[Haber] sees the world only as a means to his end," (156) he demonstrates the level of understanding that Orr possesses: he is hesitant not because he knows he could achieve the Haber's goals of improving the world if he accepted his power, but because he knows that if he tries to do so, it will only result in turmoil. We also see Le Guin highlight Haber's understanding of the potential of his success or failure in his response to Orr's assessment of the snakebite analogy. Haber agrees with Orr's claims that “[he] don[es] know whether what [he is] doing is good or bad or both” (Le Guin 140) and states that “[he] don[es] know, about eight-five percent of the time, what the hell [is he] doing with [Orr's] screwball brain” but nevertheless, he urges Orr to “move on” (Le Guin 140). By showing us that Haber is aware of his ignorance when it comes to solving the world's problems, Le Guin further demonstrates his unawareness regarding his ability to do so. He believes that if one has the power to help others, one should try to do so, regardless of whether or not one knows how to get the job done effectively. Orr recognizes this and becomes frustrated when he learns that Haber “can see nothing except his own mind – his own ideas of what should be” (Le Guin 101). Haber's willingness to admit that he doesn't know what he's doing shows us that he has an idea of ​​how virtually impossible it is to achieve his goal...