In The Landscape of History, John Lewis Gaddis makes a coherent argument regarding the debate over the objectivity of truth by stating that "objectivity as a consequence is hardly possible, and that there is therefore no such thing as the truth (Gaddis 29). The question of objective history has long been debated by many historians, and divergent views on history have led to a transition in our ways of thinking in the modern world. Ultimately, the question this article focuses on is: How objective is history? At the same time, the relationship with historical consciousness and the challenges of life in modernity will also be assessed. This article will analyze the texts of John Lewis Gaddis, Nietzsche and the birth of tragedy, Modernity and historical vision, Living in modernity and Hermeneutics. Finally, the article will argue that history is not largely objective and is fundamentally shaped by the subjectivity of the historian. John Lewis Gaddis, in his book, The Landscape of History, generates a strong argument for the historical method by bringing together multiple viewpoints in viewing history and science. The question of objective truth in history is addressed throughout Gaddis's work. In general, historians learn to select the different events that they believe to be valid. Historians must face the fact that there is no longer an "accurate" interpretation of the past because the interpretation itself is based on the historian's experience, in which people cannot directly observe (Gaddis 10). Historians can only view the past from a limited perspective, which breeds subjectivity and bias, and claiming that any piece of history is “objective” is simplistic. Seeing the world multidimensionally...... middle of paper ...... in history. There is no true objective aspect to history, but a multitude of attitudes toward history can make history a discipline that allows for multidimensionality. The debate over whether or not history could be objective has been discussed and interpreted by many historians. The way we think about history has allowed for the divergence of diverse perspectives in the world we live in today. In summary, the question addressed in this article concerns the extent to which history can be objective. This question has left room for several interpretations in the field of historiography and has challenged our experience in the era of modernity. The argument of this article has moved towards the subjective side of the argument with evidence for my argument drawn from John Gaddis, Friedrich Nietzsche, Postmodernity and Modernity, Living in Modernity and Heidegger's Hermeneutics..