Can you “set the record straight” in a post-modern world? Can an post-modern atheist or agnostic really appeal “to history”?

Just about every verbal conflict I have ever been in or watched was conducted before a presumed audience. In a verbal sparring match the assumed prize is often having your opponent accept your position. That seldom happens because pride gets in the way. (See this experiment on opinion voicing.) Deeper than that is often a desire for vindication, to be seen as correct, holding the right idea or the righteous position. This is an utterly ironic thing for a post-modern context where we argue that there is no objective right or wrong, only perspectives relativized by context.

There are lots of other ways people express this same thought. “History will judge” is another one, but it means the same thing.

Every time someone wishes to “set the record straight”, they are in fact offering a de-facto assertion that there is an observer, a judge, a final arbiter who outside of context or condition ultimately declares what is true, what is beautiful, what is good, what is. Can that be anyone or anything less than God?