What is the theory of space and place?

Introduction

Space and place are key ideas in humanistic geography. Concepts that don’t signify the same things under this methodology Space is an ethereal concept with no real significance. Place contrasts with how people are aware of or drawn to a particular area of space. A place can be thought of as a space with a purpose. This approach of thinking is based on the phenomenological theory, which looks for the fundamental characteristics of both direct and indirect experiences.

 

According to Yi-Fu Tuan and Relph, space and Place

Yi-Fu Tuan, a philosopher, and Edward Relph, a geographer, are two significant thinkers who have contributed to our understanding of what space, Place, and the contrasts between these ideas are. They essentially agree on how to distinguish between space and place.

Yi-Fu Tuan looked for the significance of location, environment, and space. According to Tuan, the distinction between “space” and “place” may be summed up by the degree to which people have given a particular location a sense of significance. There are two ways to give or extract meaning from a region, namely:

• In a direct and intimate way, for example through the senses such as vision, smell, sense and hearing.
• An in an indirect and conceptual way mediated by symbols, arts etc.

Space can be defined as a location where a person has no social relationships. This area has not gained any value. It is an open space, but may be cordoned off and defended against invaders, according to Tuan (1977, p.164–165) (Tuan, 1977, p. 4). It does not inspire or invite individuals to use their imaginations to occupy the area. It hasn’t been given a meaning. It is largely abstract (Tuan, 1977, p. 6).

Contrarily, a “place” might be regarded as a location that has been shaped by human experiences. There is no restriction on and no limit to the size of this place. It could be a town, a district, a region, a school, etc. In actuality, there is a “place” in a “space” that has been imbued by human experiences with goals and meanings. People can fulfill their biological needs, such as those for food, water, and other necessities, at places (Tuan, 1977, p. 4).

A “place” in Tuan’s view (1977, p. 6), is more than just a physical manifestation of a certain time period; it lacks discernible bounds. Arts, monuments, and architecture are a few examples.

 

Tuan was believed that individuals organize the world around themselves and give or derive meaning from its topography (Cloke, Philo & Sadler, 1991, p. 76-77). This explains why our perception of “space” and the distance separating us from this “place” are related (Cloke , P., Philo, et. al., 1991, p. 79). The adage “space is freedom, place is security” is taken from Tuan (1977, p. 3).

 

In general, Edward Relph and Tuan have similar viewpoints. Relph’s description of the link between people and their places as distant and detached, which allows individuals to think on this relationship, is an addition that may be added (Cloke, Philo, et al., 1992). Relph aims to preserve the connection between space and place in his work and avoid presenting them as distinct ideas. Since space has the capacity to spatially organize and concentrate human intentions, experiences, and actions (Seamon & Sowers, 2008). Since our perception of space is connected to the places we live in, which in turn receive meaning from their geographical context, “space and place are dialectically constructed in human environmental experience,” according to (Seamon & Sowers, 2008,p.44)