Skip to main content
One of the words that passed into our language from Arabic is "common"; jointly means together. He climbed over the root of the affiliate here. There are deeper ones, but the part that interests us is "participation", that is, to participate, to be a part of it.


So what is the common's antipode?

What is an antipode?

Let's find a geographic point in the world, a city for example, let's go down at a right angle.

We have to go down a lot, but we will pass the sand, gravel, water, oil, magma, core quickly and come out from the opposite side (hemisphere).

Here is our antipode.

You're going to say "why did you tire us so much instead of saying the opposite?", But isn't it nice to go over the antipode.

We put the common on the globe, the air of our city smells like sharing… We dived right in the middle of it… Hooop, where did we go?

The name of our city is "My space". Smell,  is "this is mine, this is mine, why isn't mine not mine?" It turns out that I was the habitat of the "me bird", the smell and the air heavy or is it heavy.  All of the areas where we diverge from the common and come out of its opposite are "My Space".

Do people and the institutional structures that they establish, adopt the field and make themselves exist in the field they own, then defend that space and make its existence meaningful in the field?

They show, of course… Or are we going to fill this short life with bickering and quarreling to say?

Therefore, the organization, the company and the state feel the need for meaning just like the individual, and does it feel the need to say "my field" by occupying a space where it will realize this meaning?

They need...

The essence of what is happening is actually  making definitions, isn't it?

We make it meaningful by defining, we create it by defining it, we give it shape. But at the same time, we solidify the conceptual structure by defining, we also define the boundary, and we define what is inside and outside this boundary.

Is that wrong?

Well, let's continue.

This is where the paradox begins to manifest itself, between the common we dive into and its antipode.

Does the organism's world of meaning form and develop within this paradox?

As if.

Can't we just stay there, not diving into the common? Isn't it possible if we don't have ownership, if we always share, always share, construct life jointly? Is it necessary to move towards my space, turn into an ego monument and create the tension of me and the other?

In the face of exactly this problem, one says, "But the system is based on competition, the system is powered by the tension of paradoxes, the system gives victory to the leader in the race, wipes out the rest, nature is like that."

I wonder?

Is it really like this, or is it because we wanted it to be like this, did we set it up like this and then we convinced ourselves of this fiction by saying “this is the way it is”?

You are right, but in this reality we are in, if we stay in the clean environment of the common, they will not let us breathe.

How do we avoid the call to "come race"?

Produce more, get more efficiency, earn more, work more, consume more, success, success, success… How do we stay civilian in a valley where no other voice resonates?

Perhaps the point is the ability to maintain balance within the paradox and manage the two-pronged process in balance with a free mind. As long as we perceive the balance not as a middle way, but as a state of constant peace, far from conflict, with the ability to know and manage both ends of the paradox.

Related Contents
STGM Destekleri

Our Services

You can examine the services that we have structured by considering the daily and structural needs of CSOs and volunteers.