Why did Jacques Derrida argue that binary oppositions are hierarchical?

Jacques Derrida argued that binary oppositions in Western philosophy are hierarchical because they are structured as pairs where one term is assumed to be primary, fundamental, or authentic, while the other is viewed as secondary, derivative, or inferior.1

These hierarchies—such as nature/culture, speech/writing, or mind/body—reflect a deep-seated bias known as the "metaphysics of presence." This is the tendency to prioritize concepts associated with presence, essence, and origin over those associated with absence and difference. For example, Western thought often privileges speech over writing, assuming speech provides a more direct, "present" access to a speaker's intentions, whereas writing is seen as a remote or secondary representation.1

Derrida contended that these hierarchies are products of logocentrism—the assumption that truth exists independently of language. By deconstructing these oppositions, Derrida aimed to show that the relationship between terms is not one-sided. Instead, he sought to "displace" these hierarchies, demonstrating that neither term is truly primary and that meaning is instead created through an endless, deferred play of linguistic differences.1