Is The Historical Discipline Under Attack By Postmodernists?

Postmodernist linguists and literary critics such as Hayden White have caused much grief for many professional historians, as they challenged the very legitimacy of history as a separate discipline and argued that historical texts were little different than works of fiction.

Beginning in the 1980s, many in the historical discipline were deeply troubled by the creeping menace of postmodernism into a field which often saw itself as a bulwark of scientific objectivity. In 1997 Richard J. Evans, a historian at the University of Cambridge wrote one of the first apologias for the beleaguered historical discipline and while he agreed that history was in crisis thanks to the relativistic challenges of the postmodernists, Evans also rejected the notion of "scientific objectivity" in history, something which has been believed by some many older generations of historians.

Yet when discussing whether history stands closer to the sciences, or instead the arts, Evans argued that what is most unique about this discipline is that it can be both at the same time. Evans underlined the diversity of historical methods and ultimately suggested that history is interdisciplinary by nature.

There is probably little to fear from "attacks" on the discipline by postmodernists. Instead, historians stand to gain by being more open to the methods and approaches of other fields and disciplines, and being able to critically assess the problems and flaws in their own methods.

Add Comment

Report