The radical importance of it is based on which history, like the medicine, is one of sciences in which the investigating subject agrees with the object to study. Of there the great responsibility of the historian: history has a projection to the future by its transforming power like tool of change of articles of incorporation; and to the professionals handle who it, the historians, are to them applicable what Marx said of the philosophers (until now they have been in charge to interpret the world and than she treats is to transform it). 9 Despite, from another perspective tries a disinterested investigation for the objectivity in historical science. 10 philosophers look for solutions concrete problems but they raise the answers with universal character, for that reason Plato, when he faces the political decomposition of Athens, after the death of Pericles, the tyrannies and the corruption of the new democracy, and raises a definitive solution and universal, the Republic that is utopian and theoretical, whereas the politicians of the time which looked for were short term solutions, patches to the problem, instead of to fix it from the foundations. History on the other hand also has a philosophical character, and needs always a philosophical narration that complements its sense. It will have, therefore, idealistic and materialistic, hegelianos and Marxist, positivistas and hermenuticos historians, etc.
The philosophy of history goes so intrinsic to history as the own thought of the historian, whom it will have, wants or it does not want, a certain philosophical perspective that always is acting. We observe that philosophy and history are always in contact with the enemy intimate. Has history a teleological sense? The teodicea demands for history a direction that leads to an eschatological end, given by a power superior. Despite his transcendental teleological sense it can be seen like immanent the same human history.