Keywords:Ontological planning, urban memory, human and environment
Debates about “being” and “existence” have continued uninterruptedly since ancient times in accordance with the evolution of philosophical thinking albeit at various levels of intensity. “Spatial Planning” which had not constitute a problem area for mankind until the industrial revolution, was linked to “ontology” either. In the post industrial revolution, on the other hand, “Cultural Delay” was regarded as a threshold before harmony in defining social problems mostly as a result of “technology-culture” oriented approaches. Failure to obtain expected results from endeavors to find solution to spatial problems in this manner of relationships paved the way for emergence of new ideas with regard to making use of ontology. However ontology has not been able to find a place for itself within the planning discipline and theory in adequate scope and dimensions in the search for a solution to the problem. This paper will make an attempt at presenting a point of view that can a modest contribution to the planning and ontology relations and try to discuss whether or not such endeavors will evolve into a method.
The theme of planning, which began and was tried to be continued as “people-oriented”, also carries an “ontological” approach at the heart of the action. The problem here is to find an answer to the question of how an institutionalized structure or system can be acquired by raising this improvised attitude to the level of consciousness, thereby enabling it to participate effectively in the planning-implementation efforts.
We are now faced with the reality that the efforts that were made from the beginning of the industrial revolution, when urban developments gained momentum, to the Euclidian understanding of planning in the 1950s and 1960s based on scientific approaches, to an approach of planning that channelled limited urban lands to profit during the urbanization process, to making “strategic” decisions on the basis of the planning decision theory and gradually evolving into a search for “strategic spatial planning” have not yielded the anticipated results.
- Can we make use of “ontology” in finding a solution to this deep-rooted and complicated question?
- If yes, how? Can macro and micro level institutional structures be used as instruments to this end, no matter how utopian they may seem today? Can existing ones be rendered more effective?
- Is it possible that there might be some among the variables of the planning (dependent and independent) that need to be opened for discussion and repositioned (like time)?
- Is it possible to redefine ontology within the hierarchical structure of planning?
We are going to seek answers to some of these questions within the limited scope of this paper and we are going to offer the rest for discussion by just asking them.
In light of these assessments, drawing attention, based on ontological knowledge relying on the wholeness of universe, to the question, on macro level planning, of whether or not the ontological realities of man, energy and movements of thinking can provide macro data for planning on a universal level as important factors affecting mankind will be one of the limited objectives of the paper.
Alkan, A. (1994). Tarihi Kentin Planlama Sorunları..Ceylan Basımevi, Konya.
Alkan, A. (2016). Ontolojik Planlama; Sille.
Alkan, A., Bala, H. A. (2014). Ontological Planning as a New Approach in Urban Development, 54th Congress of the ERSA. 26-29 August 2014, St. Petersburg. Russia.
Bilsel, G. (2007). Mekânsal Gelişme Stratejileri ve Kentsel Projeler, MSGSÜ Güzel Sanatlar Fakültesi 18. Uluslararası Tasarım ve Uygulamalar Sempozyumu, İstanbul.
Çıvgın, A. (2014). Ontolojik Temellere Dayanan Felsefi Antropoloji, Mavi Atlas, 3/2014, 109-121.
Ercan, T. (2012). Ontoloji ve Kuantum: Mevcut Diyalektik, İndigo Dergisi.
Filiz, L. (2014). Noktanın Sonsuzluğu. Cilt: I.-II-III-IV, Yayına Hazırlayanlar: Saim Öztan, Dr. Seyhun Besin, Aziz Şenol, Pan Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
Hartmann, N. (2010). Ontolojinin Işığında Bilgi. Türkiye Felsefe Kurumu, Çeviri; Harun Tepe, Özkan Matbaacılık, Ankara.
İslâmoğlu, M. (2006). Savaş Kesmeyen Sözler. Düşün Yayıncılık, İstanbul, 99.
Jalilzada, K. (2012). Nicolai Hartmann’ın Yeni Ontolojisi ve Martin Heidegger’in Ontolojiyi İhya Teşebbüsü, XII TÜFÖB Öğrenci Kongresi, Sakarya Üniversitesi.
Koca, F. (2015). Türkiye’de Geleneksel Mekân Örüntülerinin Özgün Karakter ve Kültürel Mirasını Koruma Anlayışına Ontolojik bir Yaklaşım, TMMOB Şehir Plancıları Odası Dergisi, Planlama, 25(1)pp: 32-43.
Lefebvre, H. (1996). Marx’ın Sosyolojisi. Sorun Yayınları.
Mengüşoğlu, T. (1992). Felsefeye Giriş. Remzi Kitabevi, İstanbul.
Mumford. L. (2013). Tarih Boyunca Kent. Kayhan Matbaacılık, 2. Basım İstanbul.
Oskay, F. (1978). Kültürel ve Toplumsal Değişme Konusunda William Fielding Ogburn'un Görüşleri Üzerine Bir Deneme, Eğitim ve Bilim, pp 36-47.
Öztürk, H. (2016). Fıtrat; İnsanın Ontolojik Yapısı, Kur’anî Hayat, Sayı: Mart-Nisan 2011.
Scheler, M. (2012). İnsanın Kosmostaki Yeri. Bilgesu Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
Tekeli. İ., Akay, A., Akgün, F.K. (2001). Türkiye’de Planlamada Dönüşüm Süreci: Çevre ve Koruma mı? Kentleşme ve Yapılaşma mı?, Retrieved fromAmme İdaresi Dergisi, 47 (4), 93-115 (Aralık 2014).
Toffler, A. (2008). Üçüncü Dalga. Koridor Yayıncılık, İstanbul.
Turhan. M. 2015. Kültür Değişmeleri. Altınordu yayınevi, Ankara.
Yücel, D. M. (2014). Varoluşçuluk Nedir? Felsefesi. DMY Felsefe,.Retrieved.from http://www.dmy.info/varolusculuk-nedir-felsefesi (2017).
How to Cite
1. The International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license lets the author to share (copy and redistribute) his/her article in any medium or format.
2. ICONARP cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
The author must give appropriate credit, provide a link to ICONARP, and indicate if changes were made on the article. The author may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the ICONARP endorses the author or his/her use.
The author may not use the article for commercial purposes.
If the author remix, transform, or build upon the article, s/he may not distribute the modified material.
The author may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues.
The author may use the Article within his/her employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs.
3. The author authorizes the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) to exclusively publish online his/her Article, and to post his/her biography at the end of the article, and to use the articles.
4. The author agrees to the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) using any images from the Article on the cover of the Journal, and in any marketing material.
5. As the author, copyright in the Article remains in his/her name.6. All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal.