Pick one of the following paper topics and write a 4-5 pg. paper.

1. Compare and contrast the way in which Frankfurt and Thalberg describe and theorize willing and unwilling agency, especially in cases of coercion and psychological compulsion. Which do you think best captures our intuitions regarding each (coercion and compulsion)?
2. Friedman criticizes Frankfurt's hierarchical model for placing too much ontological significance on higher order desires, arguing that part of the problem is that it invites regress problems. Explain her critique and describe how her own model is different. How does her model attempt to incorporate "lower orders" of motivation and interests into the notion of autonomy? Is her attempt to inscribe a broader notion of the authentic self into her model successful in avoiding regress problems? Why or why not?
3. Explain the distinction Frankfurt is trying to make between persons and wantons. How is this distinction supposed to help us understand the notion of desires internal to a person and those external to a person? What is Penelhum's (and Friedman's) objection to this account? What is Frankfurt's reply? Who do you think is correct? Why?
4. Both Christman and Watson describe the problem of the infinite regress. What is it? How does Frankfurt, the later Dworkin, and finally Christman attempt to resolve the problem? Do you think any of them are successful? Explain why or why not in each case.
5. Meyers and Frankfurt develop different conceptions of a "person" to theorize autonomy. However, both rely upon similar notions of integrating (or unifying) our identity to support their theories. It is, of course, a common intuition that real people are hardly ever thoroughly uniform and/or fixed in their personality (and one may wonder whether or not that would be a desirable goal at all). What do these theorists have to say about such intuitions? Which model best accommodates this intuition? Do either of them deal with it satisfactorily? Why?