在康德底整個哲學系統中，其歷史哲學一向為學者所忽規，因為他們往往認為康德哲學是非歷史的，因而無法處理歷史底問題。此外，由於其歷史哲學底特性，它也常被視為過渡到黑格爾、乃至馬克思底歷史哲學的橋樑。依據康德底「歷史」 概念，人類在歷史底進程中不斷地趨向於其最終目標---永久和平。因此，康德底人類史可以預示未來，並且預設目的論原則。這些特性使人很容易將其歷史哲學與黑格爾、馬克思底歷史哲學視為同一型態，而一併歸諸歷史決定論。 　　本文旨在說明康德底「歷史」概念在其整個哲學系統中的意義與地位，尤其著重於它與其他部分之間的一貫性，藉以凸顯其歷史哲學與黑格爾、馬克思底歷史哲學之根本差異。筆者認為：這種差異非但不表示康德歷史哲學之不成熟，反而顯示出其優點。

　In the study of Kantian philosophy, Kant’s philosophy of history is probably the most neglected branch, As Kant’s philosophy is of ten viewed as ahistorical, it is therefore considered not apt for dealing with the problem of history. Furthermore, certam characteristics of Kant’s philosophy of history render it to be seen as a passage leading to Hegel’s philosophy of history and even to Marx’s. According to Kant’s concept, human history is an unending process of nearing its final destination, that is, the perpetual peace, History, therefore, anticipates human future and presupposes teleological principles. Due to characteristics like this, Kant’s philosophy of history tends to be interpreted as akin to that of Hegel and of Marx and grouped as part of historical determinism. This study intends to clarify the position as well as the significance of Kant’s philosophy of history in relation to the totality of his system, with an emphasis on its consistency with his other thoughts, and thereby to highlight the fundamental differences between Kant’s philosophy of history and that of Hegel and Marx. What these differences reveal, are the strengths rather than insufficiencies of his philosophy of history.