​ARCHITECTURAL NOTION OF FREEDOM AND PARTICIPATION AND ITS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SPACES

Isra TATLIĆ

Article Details

ARCHITECTURAL NOTION OF FREEDOM AND PARTICIPATION AND ITS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SPACES

Authors:

Isra TATLIĆ

Publisher:

Bilsas Bilim Sanat Spor Yapım

Journal:

International Journal of Architecture and Urban Studies 2019 Vol.4 Issue 1, pp.31-42

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

3/2019

Document Language:

English

Document ID (Org No.):

2000718470

Frequency:

Bi-Annual

pISSN:

2147-9836

Abstract:

 

The application of social plan and vision, whether it is written utopias or their models, is achieved through a system of norms and limitations. The society or the state propounds such systems by law, while the architect or planner applies them through design. The use of freedom and control in order to manage design and its contextualization is the central aspect of the system of norms. They represent the main tools used in the strategy of thinking of settlements, cities and states. The concept of freedom and control in philosophy is observed in relation to two different views. The first point concerns the metaphysical condition of the human being, while others consider their political status.  May 2011, 71  According to Todd May, metaphysical freedom denies full determination of human life and in a sense recognizes the existence of certain control of thoughts and behaviours. The second type, according to May, analyses the freedom that an individual has  or not  in relation to a particular society.  May 2011, 73  Participatory design, most commonly associated with the concept of freedom of decisionmaking, possesses specific methodological processes but also specific typological determinations. The most common use of participation is in urban planning and housing architecture, which demonstrates its link to private and semi-private spaces and mainly individual rights, while preserving the community. This relationship changes in public architecture, where the decision-making process is predominantly realized at the macro level  or the topdown principle  in the form of projective reality. What spatial character should public spaces have, especially the civil service whose purpose is to apply democracy and achieve equality? Does the reduction of control of a macro social level achieve the requirements of a particular user or community, and what are the public physical structures that determine the spatial quality of freedom?.

Article Details

​ARCHITECTURAL NOTION OF FREEDOM AND PARTICIPATION AND ITS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SPACES

Authors: Isra TATLIĆ

Publisher: Bilsas Bilim Sanat Spor Yapım

Journal: International Journal of Architecture and Urban Studies 2019 Vol.4 Issue 1, pp.31-42

Document Type: Article

Publication Date: 3/2019

Document Language: English

Document ID (Org No.): 2000718470

Frequency: Bi-Annual

pISSN: 2147-9836

Issues

ARCHITECTURAL NOTION OF FREEDOM AND PARTICIPATION AND ITS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SPACES

Authors:

Isra TATLIĆ

Publisher:

Bilsas Bilim Sanat Spor Yapım

Journal:

International Journal of Architecture and Urban Studies 2019 Vol.4 Issue 1, pp.31-42

Document Type:

Article

Publication Date:

3/2019

Document Language:

English

Document ID (Org No.):

2000718470

Frequency:

Bi-Annual

pISSN:

2147-9836