ABSTRACT
Comparing Immanuel Kant's impact on philosophy as a whole to his impact on political philosophy in particular, reveals an impressive disparity. This chapter describes the original social contract view and its appeal. It presents Hume's criticism of the view and the positive, sentimentalist account he proposes in its stead. The chapter presents Kant's proposed alternative, focusing on the ways in which his modifications of the original contract enable him to satisfy certain desiderata that earlier versions of the social contract and Hume's account of political obligation fail to satisfy. It explores some Kantian criticisms of sentimentalist moral philosophy, clarifying why Kant must reject an account of political obligation such as Hume's. Not only does the social contract account of political authority rely, according to Hume, on dubious historical and psychological theses, it also rests on an incorrect analysis of obligation.
