The Strawhorsemen of the Apocalypse: Relativism and the Historian as Expert Witness

11 Pages Posted: 7 Nov 2014

Date Written: April 1, 1998

Abstract

This brief essay is a response to the claim, made forcefully by Daniel Farber in “Adjudication of Things Past: Reflections on History as Evidence,” 49 Hast. L.J. 1009 (1998), that the increasing use of postmodern theories of truth by historians has undermined their ability to acts as expert witnesses. The essay suggests that Farber’s claim is incorrect because he overestimates the extent to which the historical profession has been influenced by postmodernism, and because he underestimates the ability of the adversarial process to uncover and disarm whatever small fragments of relativistic history make their way into the courtroom. The essay also explains why the historical profession has been accused of abandoning its commitment to truth-seeking. It suggests that the answer to this question has more to do with contemporary cultural politics than with any actual commitment by historians to postmodern epistemologies. Finally, the essay suggests that Farber ignores a more serious threat to the integrity of historical profession: falsehoods, myths, and ideologically-biased narratives masquerading as truths under the banner of objectivity.

Suggested Citation

Schiller, Reuel, The Strawhorsemen of the Apocalypse: Relativism and the Historian as Expert Witness (April 1, 1998). Hastings Law Journal, Vol. 49, 1998, UC Hastings Research Paper No. 1998-01, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2519727

Reuel Schiller (Contact Author)

UC Law, San Francisco ( email )

200 McAllister Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
42
Abstract Views
437
PlumX Metrics