Response to Jacques Derrida,
“Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences”1 (1970)

As you begin reading Derrida’s essay, you can’t help but to feel as though he may be hiding some insecurity behind such abstract writing. Either that, or he is hiding some brilliant idea behind words so complex no average mind could contemplate the depth of his knowledge.

In the opening pages of the essay, Derrida uses the word “event” followed by contesting the very identity of the word. He follows this by explaining that while all structures must have a center, the very idea of an existing center or even structure “would limit what we might call the freeplay of the structure.” Thus, for many years we have limited ourselves by focusing on this structure or center. He follows that there has occured what he calls a “decentering.”

But even with this decentering, he admits that there is still the sign. That there must be a sign and it cannot be removed. Nevertheless, it seems as though the only reason he keeps the idea of the sign, is to tear it down.

In the course of his essay, Derrida gives his standpoint that a new structure of philosophy has evolved. A philosophy in which the very basis of it’s structure is that it has no structure, no limits, no bounds, nothing to hold it back. The former train of thought has long passed, traditional or classic thinking is over, and we can go anywhere we want to.

This new philosophy coincides with and complements the 21st century; we have no limits, no bounds, and nothing to hold us back. What the mind can conceive and believe, it can achieve.