This essay critically examines the so-called 'unnaturalness' of historical thinking. I identify and analyse three lines of argument frequently invoked by historians to defend the validity of historical inquiry in response to scepticism, which is often couched in postmodern terms. In doing so, I highlight that these lines of argument are predicated upon historians' thought processes and concepts being "domain general." This idea of historical thinking as part of our ordinary thinking could help us develop a history curriculum in which students are required to employ those processes and concepts to solve "both" everyday "and" historical questions. With such a curriculum, students could more easily see the relevance of history education to their daily lives.