POST-MODERNISTS' CONCEPTION OF HISTORY AND A CRITIQUE OF THE END OF HISTORY BY FRANCIS FUKUYAMA
Abstract
Post-modernists attempt to fragmentise and decentralise the study of history by providing a metanarrative framework for historicising events. There is the rejection of grand narratives as overarching stories or theories cannot fully explain historical events or societies. They are antithetical to truth and objective realism, denying historical and scientific truth as well as the general philosophical viewpoints taken for granted during the 18th-century Enlightenment. The viewpoint was that there is an objective, natural reality whose existence and properties are logically independent of human beings – of their minds, societies, social practices, or their investigative techniques. They dismissed these ideas because they were seen as naïve realism. A concentration on current life issues, rather than the past, as well as introspective studies of the present, has given a new dimension to the study of not only history but also science. However, no ideology or theory is accurate. All the techniques used in the study of the past and the present are equally important in understanding how societies have evolved to their current state. This paper interrogates the Postmodernists' position on the study of history. This is achieved by examining the nature of history and its relevance to society, as well as the methods historians employ in studying the past and the present. In doing this, the historical process is used, utilising written documents and an interdisciplinary approach through extensive consultations. The scope encompasses the period from postmodernism's emergence as a school of thought to its contributions to the development of science and historiography. It has been observed that history is a continuous process of dialogue with the past, present, and future. Therefore, despite the inherent weaknesses of historical sources, history will remain a relevant discipline and will never come to an end, as Francis Fukuyama argued. This is because historians also study the present in relation to the past and engage in introspection, just as other disciplines do, which continue to shape modern thinking and development. Research of this magnitude will undoubtedly lead to further studies, as it addresses contemporary issues of historical value.