Structuralism, modernism, colonialism etc. are concepts which categorized the society, constructed concepts and created law and order. These schools of thought restricted the world to think beyond the demarcation that they have created. During this period Europe was at center and the rest was its periphery.

But, the “post” of all these thoughts is actually questioning their ideology and politics. Derrida with the example of a nonexistent word differance questioned the rigid system of the society. Barbara Johnson in her article Writing mentions that Derrida particularly wanted to demonstrate that speech is not superior to writing as the meaning carried is always differed and deferred in a spatial-temporal framework.  Further, she says that he questions the binary oppositions where they are arranged in a hierarchy and one of these binaries is superior in the ranking order. Hence, Derrida is basically deconstructing all the centers so that there would not be any peripheries, so that there would not be any authority, dominance and control over the rest of the world. He is therefore not interested in looking at “Black” and “white” as binary opposite but rather the nuances of ‘grey’ between them. So he says in the very beginning that “Differance is neither a word nor a concept” and it does not fall under any constructed system of knowledge. It is the grey area that is intangible, nonrigid and without category.  He relates differance not to Consciousness but to unconsciousness and he says “…..contrary to the terms of an old debate, strongly symptomatic of the metaphysical investments it has always assumed, the “unconscious” can no more be classed as a “thing” than as anything else; it is no more of a thing than an implicit or masked consciousness”, he also relates it not to present or absent but to traces and he calls differance a strategy without finality.

“It is hazardous because this strategy is not simply one in the sense that we say that strategy orients the tactics according to a final aim, a telos or the theme of a domination, a mastery or an ultimate reappropriation of movement and field. In the end, it is a strategy without finality”. This quote of Derrida in Differance can very well be related to Lyotard’s “The Postmodern Condition” where post modernists are being criticized “for not taking a stand on issues of value”. I believe because post-modernism is “a strategy without finality”. Taking stand would be again constructing concepts or centers which would in turn create its own periphery. Lyotard further goes on arguing about Legitamation and delegitimation of knowledge. How knowledge was being legitimized by only few institutions in Europe during Enlightenment and how in contemporary and post modern world it is formulated in different ways .In this contemporary world where we do not have any more metanarratives, no universal language, where “research has become compartmentalized and no one can master them all”, philosophy is in crisis; legitimation of knowledge is a question of power today not probably by the state or institutions as it were traditionally but by the capitalism. “Scientists, technicians, and instruments are purchased not to find the truth, but to augment power”. Hence the role of truth or reality which was earlier a strong notion is now appropriated, in fact Lyotard says “By reinforcing technology, one “reinforces” reality, and one’s chances of being just and right increase accordingly”.

But ‘reality’ according to Baudrillard is simulacra and we are in a world of simulations…….THE STABLE WORLD HAS BEEN SHAKEN DRASTICALLY……….