Length: A minimum of two (full) pages (double-spaced, normal margins, normal size font, etc.) per question. You cannot answer these questions well in fewer pages than that—and may, indeed, require more. **Remember that you are submitting the exam via email attachment, not through Canvas—just like you’ve done with the previous assignments. ** Answer all of the following questions. Make sure that your answers are clear, thoughtful, and thorough—and that you always explain and defend them. 1. Williams thinks that the doctrine of negative responsibility, which follows from the principle of utility, undermines personal integrity. Do you agree that being held responsible for the consequences of not acting, of failing to prevent something, will (always or sometimes?) erode the idea of personal integrity? Is there any way to be a utilitarian and still respect the integrity of individuals? [30pts.] 2. Morality tells us what we ought to do, and imposes upon us duties which it would be wrong not to fulfill. Yet Kant claims, in Chapter Two of the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, that autonomy—the ability to choose for ourselves what to do—is crucial for morality. That might appear somewhat contradictory. First, briefly explain the role of autonomy in Kantian ethics. Then argue either that Kant is correct or incorrect in claiming that morality requires autonomy. [30pts.] 3. Aristotle seems to think that it’s not possible for anyone to be born virtuous, but that we need virtuous role models if we’re to become virtuous ourselves. Do you think he’s right? Granted that one needs to have practical wisdom to be virtuous, why couldn’t someone just be naturally wise? That is, why couldn’t someone simply be naturally inclined to choose moderation, and naturally possessed of the ability to deliberate about how to achieve virtuous ends? [30pts.] 4. Utilitarianism, Kantianism , and virtue ethics can all claim to have aspects that are intuitively appealing to us. Whether it’s the utilitarian’s focus on happiness, or the Kantian’s focus on respect for individuals, or the virtue ethicist’s focus on living well, all three theories have their strengths. And all three have weaknesses. After having looked at all three views, as a final question for your consideration this term: Which of the three theories we’ve studied do you find most appealing, and why? You needn’t fully endorse any one of them, but I would like you to explain as fully and carefully as possible which theory speaks loudest to you. [30pts.] Reminders: Citing: As mentioned on the syllabus, you are absolutely required to provide citations for any material or ideas that are not your own. If you quote, paraphrase, or even just borrow an idea from any source, you must cite that source (in parentheses, a footnote, or an endnote). I do not have a preferred citation method; my advice is to use whatever method you are most familiar and comfortable with—so that you make sure that you do it! Failure to provide citations for all sources has dire consequences, so please do whatever you need to do to make sure it doesn’t happen by accident. Writing: I expect your responses to be well written. The Vaughn book is a good guide, covering everything from aspects of philosophical writing that are possibly different from writing in other contexts to basic guidelines for good writing in general. Make use of this book! Also make sure you follow my Writing Tips (in the “Extra Documents” module), have your responses proofread, etc. Note that lack of clarity can result in loss of points