本文嘗試釐清尼采於〈歷史對人生之利弊〉一文中對於歷史的觀點以及其對歷史跟人生關係的主張。其中主要說明尼采於本篇論文如何批判「歷史」目的論及歷史書寫的方法論：尼采認為人類活動以及歷史本身沒有終極目的、歷史書寫不可能達至客觀的要求。換言之，追求客觀性目標的歷史書寫將因為作為純粹的理論性知識而成為人類生活與行動的阻礙、使人類的生命萎縮與僵化。歷史知識以及記憶在尼采的眼中，成為人類生命之自主性創造與實踐的絆腳石。藉此尼采展示人類個體的生命特徵：生命不僅不可能永恆不朽、甚至並非實體性的存在、同時不必然是合乎理性、道德的與正義的。生命是必朽的、是一個不斷流變的、及難以理性掌握的現象。通過對歷史與歷史書寫態度的分析，尼采強調生命必須不斷地透過自主的抉擇、行動與實踐來自我實現與自我超越。

This paper tries to elucidate what Nietzsche’s view of history and his
thesis about the relationship between history and life would be in his essay On the Advantages and Disadvantages of History for the Life. It is above all to explain how Nietzsche criticizes the teleology of history and the methodology of historiography in this article: Nietzsche claims that there would be no ultimate destination of human activities and the history itself, and that historical writing could not fulfill the objective standard. In another words, the historical writing which runs after the goal of objectivity would, as purely theoretical knowledge, become an obstacle of human life and
action, and would then wither and ossify the human life. Historical
knowledge and memory would be, in the sight of Nietzsche, a stone of
stumbling to autonomous creativity and practice of human life. By this
Nietzsche demonstrates the characteristics of human individual life: Neither can life be eternal and immortal, nor would it even be a substantial being; at the same time, it would not necessarily be rational, moral and just. Life is mortal and is a perpetually changing and unfathomable phenomenon. By analyzing the attitude toward history and historical writing, Nietzsche lays the emphasis that life would have to realize itself and surpass itself by the autonomous determination, action and practice.