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 it exists, therefore, there is no such thing as truth (Gaddis 29). The question of objective history has long been debated by numerous historians, and different views of history have led to a transition in our thinking in the modern world. Ultimately, the question this article focuses on is: to what extent is history objective? Along with this, the relationship with historical consciousness and the challenges of modern life will also be evaluated. 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, but is fundamentally shaped through 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 points of view to view history and the sciences. The question of objective truth in history is addressed throughout Gaddis' work. In general, historians learn to select the various events that they find valid. Historians must face the fact that there is an “accurate” interpretation of the past that ceases to exist because the interpretation itself is based on the historian's experience, in which people cannot directly observe (Gaddis 10). Historians can only see the past in a limited perspective, which breeds subjectivity and bias, and claiming that a piece of history is “objective” is simplistic. Seeing the world in a multi-dimension... in the middle of the paper... in the story. There is no true objective aspect to history, but a multitude of attitudes towards history can make history a discipline that allows for multidimensionality. The debate regarding whether or not history can be objective has been discussed and interpreted by many historians. The way we think about history has allowed for the divergence of various perspectives in the world we live in today. In summary, the question discussed in this article concerns the extent to which history can be objective. This question has left room for different interpretations in the field of historiography and has challenged our experience in the era of modernity. The argument of this article has focused on the subjective side of the topic with evidence supporting my argument from John Gaddis, Friedrich Nietzsche, Postmodernity and Modernity, Living in Modernity, and Heidegger's Hermeneutics..