Space as an "interval of tolerance" between property and commons

This thesis aims to examine the relation of the concept of "space" to "possession" and "commoning". It is intended to discuss the spatiality of possession and commoning. The thesis produces questions and proposes discussion methods for the examination of spatialities. The main question of the thesis is "[how] does human being dwell in space?". The relation of "human being and space" is discussed through this question. Related with the main question, "property" is integrated to discussion as spatiality of possession and "commons" as spatiality of commoning. Property is a mechanism that permits human beings to possess some things and to have some rights on these things. Historically it has been theorized by occupation, prescription, labor, social benefit and freedom. Through the right of possession, property becomes an otherizing and exclusionary mechanism that sets the spatial relations of human beings by separating them into groups as owners and non-owners. On the other hand, commons is a commoning practice based on equality, collaboration, production and sharing and a form of relation that is open to all kinds of participation. It has emerged as a social reaction to property based concepts that spread to all sides of life practices. From this point of view, the thesis has focused on "human being's dwelling [between property and commons]". Because humans are social beings, the openness and closure of spatialities of coexistence between property and commons are questioned. These spatialities are "spatial tendencies, theoretical structures and actualities". Spatial tendencies are "sedentarism and nomadism" that exist in human nature. Theoretical structures are "philosophy, architecture, language and politics" that produce ideas, theories, knowledge and practices about property and commons and institutionalize the theoretical productions. Actualities are "virtual and physical" actualities that question the property relations and the commoning practices. The thesis's discussion of "human being's dwelling [between property and commons]" and the method of discussion are simultaneously examined. To discuss the spatialities between property and commons not in opposite spatial relations but together with their potentials and problems is identified as the "method problem" of the thesis. To achieve this method problem, the thesis proposes a new approach as a discussion through "interval" instead of dual criticism. This interval is called "interval of tolerance" which is based on the principle of "tolerance". Tolerance is a peaceful coexistence of different ideas, beliefs and life practices. It occurs in the interactions of differences and in the intentions of maintaining of relationships. In the thesis tolerance is identified as a spatial concept to evaluate the spatialities of differences. The tool of discussion is also problematized as much as the method of discussion achieved by the concept of "interval of tolerance". For this purpose, the networks of relations of spatialities [spatial tendencies, theoretical structures and actualities] between property and commons were mapped. Graph Commons which is a web based collaborative platform for mapping networks is used as a tool for mapping the spatialities. The map of spatial networks between property and commons is called "the graphic of the interval of tolerance". In the graphic, spatialities between property and commons are defined as connection points; and networks between connection points are defined as "interval of tolerance". This definition is based on the idea that the interval of tolerance is an environment of tolerance that makes the interaction of differences possible and promotes maintaining of relationships between differences. Accordingly, expansion of networks of relations means that the interval of tolerance is widening; on the opposite side, contraction of networks of relations means that the interval of tolerance is narrowing. According to the graphic, the interval of tolerance is widening toward the commons. Another finding from the graphic is that the "theoretical structures" have the strongest relations with others in the interval of tolerance. The power of relations is based on their potentials of producing ideas, theories, knowledge and practices, creating discussions and integrating others into discussions. Due to the similarities of the position of theoretical structures and the principle of tolerance as a coexistence of differences, theoretical structures are evaluated as constitutive structures in the interval of tolerance. This position of the theoretical structures also indicates the productive and critical sides of academic productions of philosophy, architecture, language and politics. The thesis's discussion of the spatialities [spatial tendencies, theoretical structures and actualities] between property and commons in the "interval of tolerance" consists of four chapters. The first chapter primarily explains the main questions of thesis pertaining to possession, commoning and space. Later on, the method problem of the thesis is described as to discuss the spatialities between property and commons not in opposite relations but together with their potentials and problems. And then the concept of the "interval" is presented as a proposal instead of dual criticism. The second chapter asks the main question of the thesis "[how] does human being dwell in space?". Through this question the relations between "human being and thing" and "human being and space" are examined. For the examination, primarily the concepts of "possession and commoning" are analyzed through Sartre's concept of "possession as a lack to be satisfied" and Deleuze and Guattari's concept of "desire as a production". After that, the concepts of "property and commons" are analyzed and discussed in terms of their spatialities. This chapter includes a deep theoretical and historical research about property and commons. The third chapter begins with the definition of the concept of "tolerance". And then the "human being's dwelling [between property and commons]" is evaluated in the "interval of tolerance". According to this evaluation, the spatialities [spatial tendencies, theoretical structures and actualities] between property and commons are described and discussed within the process of the "emergence, expansion, folding and centerline" of the interval of tolerance. In this chapter, all spatial discussions of property and commons are visualized by the graphic of the interval of tolerance. The final chapter evaluates the results of the discussions regarding to property and commons in the interval of tolerance. Property and commons are generally theorized in opposite sides. The thesis has demonstrated that when they are evaluated in an approach of interval, it is seen that they have direct or indirect relations. But the relations of property and commons are not in an extent which can balance the interval of tolerance; accordingly the interval of tolerance is widening toward the commons.