In The Lathe of Heaven, Ursula K. Le Guin uses the unique power struggle between George Orr and Dr. Haber to argue that a single person is not capable of tackling all the negative aspects of a society. Many people may argue that those with both power and altruistic intentions have the ability to improve society as a whole, but the consequences of Haber's actions show us otherwise. Although one might believe that Dr. Haber has good intentions and desires power solely to improve the world for everyone, he seems to entirely overestimate the amount of good that 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 dream as a power to be controlled, but he 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 manage situations, but rather “follow[s]” (Le Guin 125). Thus, Haber is not only wrong in his perception of power, but also in the methods by which an individual can exercise that power. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay From the beginning, Haber lived by the philosophy that the individual is responsible for creating meaningful change in society throughout his career. We learned this early on when he told Orr that "[a] person is defined solely by the extent of his influence over others" and asserted that "morality is a completely meaningless term unless to be defined as the good that one does to others,” thus demonstrating his firm belief in the duty of the individual (Le Guin 53). From the beginning of his relationship with Haber, Orr recognizes the negative results of Haber's logic, pushing him to "stop using [his] dreams to make things better" because "[t]his is wrong" (Le Guin 81). But Haber, determined to use this power he has discovered to improve the world, refuses to acknowledge the negative consequences of his actions, despite Orr's warnings. He believes that the end justifies the means and makes this clear to Orr when he asks if "the very purpose of man on earth" is "to do things, to change things, to direct 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. Not only does he believe that an individual has the ability to bring positive change to society as a whole, but that it is his or her duty to attempt to achieve this at all costs. Despite these intentions, many of his attempts to create a better life for all humans result in death, unrest, and devastating changes in society. Thus, it would be logical to assert that this goal is simply not achievable, no matter how altruistic one's intentions may be, because one person alone is incapable of improving everyone's lives at once. While it is true that Haber was unable to see his vision come to fruition. , one could argue that the reason Haber failed to achieve his goal is not because it is impossible for anyone to achieve it, but simply because the way he went about it was bad. Haber himself attempts to assert this when he infers that “Orr’s irresponsibility was the cause of the deaths of many innocent people” (Le Guin 118). In this, Haber creates doubt by blaming Orr for thishappened, which brings readers to an important consideration. Is Haber creating chaos by attempting to harness Orr's powers for good, or is Orr creating chaos by resisting Haber's attempts to use his effective dreams in a more controlled setting? Le Guin seems to place the blame on Haber, who comes to the conclusion that "[he] had been too protective, too lenient with Orr" (118) when Orr tells him about the effective, uncontrolled dream that led to the alien invasion , and that it was ultimately Haber's inattention that led to the chaos. In fact, when Le Guin, from Haber's point of view, writes, "he must face what he has done" (118), she does not make it clear who Haber is referring to. Is he 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 face the consequences for giving Orr the opportunity to do so? The fact that Le Guin leaves this thought to the reader's interpretation implies that she is indicting both Orr and Haber for their contributions to the negative results of the dream, however different those contributions may be. Where Haber contributes to the devastation by eagerly using Orr's interpretation. effective dreams, Orr himself contributes, through his hesitation, to allowing Haber to control them. He is not convinced that Haber possesses the ability to play God by manipulating his dreams in the hopes of creating a better world. He continually communicates this perspective to Haber, prompting him to say that “[the] 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 can. He compares the situation to that of a woman dying from a snake bite and asks Orr if "[he] would refuse [the serum] because 'that's the way it is'" rather than save her life (The Guin (140) Orr refuses to give him an answer, believing that the two situations are not comparable. He later reflects that "the snakebite serum analogy was false" because it only concerned two individuals (Le. Guin 155). We could say that Orr refutes Haber's analogy because he does not want to be held responsible for the responsibility his effective dreams have placed on him. However, it seems to me that there is more to it. that; the reluctance to exercise power behind his hesitation When Le Guin writes that Orr believes that “[Haber] sees the world only as a means to an end” (156), she demonstrates the level of understanding that. possesses Orr – he hesitates not because he hesitates he knows that he could achieve 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 lead to trouble. We also see Le Guin emphasizing Haber's understanding of the potential for his success. or a failure in responding to Orr's assessment of the snakebite analogy. Haber agrees with Orr's assertions that "[he] does not know whether what he is doing is right or wrong or both" (Le Guin 140) and asserts that "[he] does not know, about eight-five percent of the time, what’s he doing with Orr’s screwed brain,” but despite this, he urges Orr to “keep going” (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 of his ability to do so. He believes that if one has the power to help others, one should attempt to do so, whether or not one knows how to do the job effectively. Orr recognizes this and becomes frustrated when he learns that Haber "can't see anything except his mind—his ideas about what should be" (Le Guin 101). The will to..