IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Philosophical Perspectives on the Social Contract Theory: Hobbes, Kant and Buchanan Revisited. A Comparison of Historical thought Surrounding the Philosophical Consequences of the Social Contract and Modern Public Choice Theory. (English version)

Listed author(s):
  • Ph.D. Canditate Mathias ROYCE


    (Dip. MktgComm (BAW), Dip. Mgt (Open), MBA (Open) is a current Doctoral Candidate in Political Economy [D. PolEc] at the SMC Swiss Management Center in Zurich/Switzerland. His research interests include contemporary European and pan-Asian/Pacific Comparative Politics, Austrian Economics and Libertarian Political Philosophy. SMC Swiss Management Center Balz Zimmermannstrasse 7, CH-8302 Zurich-Kloten, Switzerland)

Registered author(s):

    To what extent is a prevalent social order that is constructed upon the freedom of the individual impacted by decisions taken in the domain of positive economics? How does the Hobbesian reductionist view of the state of nature correlate to the Kantian view of selfruled individualism expressed through rationality and autonomy? Applying Hobbesian thought in a democratic-economic context explains established and customary behaviour patterns of political economy in a reduced environmental setting. In precisely such setting individuals remain individuals on the basis of their ability to freely enter into contracts and any political means are attached to these individuals governed through an artificially constructed social contract. In the value-based and moral understanding of the social contract in its Kantian interpretation, the individual demands dignity and respect. This consequently justifies the individual as an end, rather than only a mean. How does Hobbesian and Kantian philosophy measure-up to Buchanan’s public choice theory and to what degree does the inclusion of morals in public choice lead to a normative diffusion of the social contract theory?

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Editura Lumen, Department of Economics in its journal Postmodern Openings.

    Volume (Year): 4 (2010)
    Issue (Month): (December)
    Pages: 45-62

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:lum:rev3rl:v:4:y:2010:i::p:45-62
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lum:rev3rl:v:4:y:2010:i::p:45-62. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Amariei Mirela)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.