ABSTRACT
This chapter explores the extent to which utilitarianism and contractarianism are compatible. It distinguishes between two types of utilitarians: fundamentalist utilitarians and quasi-utilitarians. It focuses on two attitudes one might have toward the idea of a social contract and sketches two varieties of contractarian political theories: social contractarianism and market contractarianism. The chapter uses John Rawls's version of social contractarianism, in particular what he calls the 'Kantian interpretation'. It explores two main reasons why few philosophers have attempted to unite the work done in the market contractarian and the fundamentalist utilitarian traditions: the first Sidgwick factor and the second arise from well-known supposed counter-examples or problem cases for utilitarianism. Jan Narveson has used market contractarianism to develop and defend a powerful version of Nozickean libertarianism. The market contractarian holds that the great strength of contractarianism is that it offers the potential of uniting rationality with morality.
