Source: “On the Resurrection: volume 1”: Evidences, 2024 by Gary Habermas Published by B&H Academic Brentwood, Tennessee.
Objectivity Postmodernism Realism.pdf
3. Historical Postmodernism.mp3
In the late twentieth century, the field of history experienced a significant shift toward postmodernism, a movement that fractured the traditional consensus on objectivity by emphasizing how personal biases and linguistic structures shape our understanding of the past. This perspective often views historical records as subjective narratives akin to fiction, suggesting that historians interpret data through their own ideological paradigms rather than discovering absolute truths. However, the text argues that these radical skeptical claims are frequently self-contradictory and fallacious, as even the most cynical scholars must rely on knowable historical facts to construct their arguments. Most professional historians have consequently adopted a pragmatic synthesis, acknowledging their own limitations and prejudices while maintaining that rigorous historiographical tools can still produce reliable, probable knowledge of past events. Ultimately, the source defends the discipline’s ability to reach warranted explanations through a middle ground that respects the reality of the past without ignoring the subjective nature of the human lens.
We’ve all heard some version of it: "history is written by the victors." In an age of widespread skepticism, this sentiment feels intuitive. The formal term for it, popularized by philosopher Jean-François Lyotard, is an "incredulity toward metanarratives"—a deep suspicion of any grand, overarching story about the past. This challenge to historical objectivity, broadly known as postmodernism, has become a major intellectual force.
Yet, a closer look at the postmodern critique of history—using the words of its proponents and sharpest analysts—reveals a profound irony. The theory that sought to dismantle historical truth is itself deeply flawed, internally contradictory, and surprisingly toothless in practice. Here are the five critical flaws that reveal why the promised "end of history" never arrived.
1. Most Historians Just... Kept Doing History.
Despite decades of intense academic debate about the death of historical truth, the actual impact on the daily work of most professional historians has been surprisingly minimal. The vast majority of contemporary historians remain realists, operating under the assumption that the past is knowable. This wasn't just academic inertia; it was a rejection based on common sense. As historian John Tosh explains, the postmodern challenge ultimately "flies in the face of common experience." Even Keith Jenkins, a leading postmodern theorist, admits that his camp is a distinct minority.