In this paper, I would like to show that Koselleck’s thesis on the dissolution of the topos historia magistra vitae in modernity is open to certain objections, to the extent that one finds in modernity a number of practical conceptions of history which are “useful for life”. My own thesis is that the topos of history as the “Guide to Life” is not so much dissolved as rather transformed with modernity, and in a sense which has to be specified. This point of view will be defended with reference to European authors of the nineteenth century (I focus on the examples of Droysen and Nietzsche), though I will add some observations on the twentieth century in the last part of the paper.

在本文中，我想表明，在现代性中发现了一些对“有用的生命”的实用历史概念时，科塞尔克关于现代社会中解散历史学的论点是有某些异议的。 ”。我自己的论点是，作为“生命指南”的历史主题并没有那么消散，而是随着现代性而改变了，在某种意义上必须加以说明。尽管我将在本文的最后部分添加一些关于20世纪的观察结果，但将参考19世纪的欧洲作者来捍卫这一观点（我将重点放在Droysen和Nietzsche的例子上）。