This paper will analyze Paul Ricoeur's Neo-Kantian proposal to articulate memory and history. The first step is to consider the concept of representation as a way to make both means of referring to the past comparable. In the next step, these two types of representations are articulated by leading back to Heidegger's temporal ontology. Amongst other consequences of this foundation, it follows that the possibilities of past agents can be reinterpreted in the present. This situation legitimizes the impossibility of setting fixed rules for the articulation between memory and history. Finally, this paper will discuss whether the philosopher does, or does not, commit a fallacy of composition, since his description is based on a specific form of history, while his prescriptions seem to have a general reach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]