Of Wolf and Man

               Is the man becoming a beast, or is the beast becoming a man? 

“And God made the two great lights” (Bereishit 1:16), but it is also written [in the same verse] “The greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night’” [implying that one was greater than the other].

The moon said before the Holy One, blessed be He: “Master of the Universe, is it possible for two kings to share the same crown?”

God therefore said to [the moon], “Go and diminish yourself.”

She said before Him: “Master of the Universe, just because I made a correct observation before You, I should diminish myself?”

God said to her: “Go and rule during both the day and the night.”

She said to Him: “Of what use is a candle at midday?”

God saw that the moon was not appeased. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: “Bring atonement for Me, since I diminished the moon.”

In this Rabbinical story, God accuses himself of diminishing the moon. He recognizes that the light, which was once equal to the Sun, must become second to it (Jewish mysticism presupposes the moon had its own light, but "moon" does not mean the satellite but a spiritual concept). 

The Moon symbolizes the cyclical nature of emotions and social processes. The Rabbinical calendar is structured around the moon, which dictates holidays, observances, liturgy, and social costumes. This means that the trivial processes of human life, such as when to work, when to marry, and when to go to the temple, should all revolve around the moon. It also means that the liturgy, types, and meanings of prayer will regular the emotional and conscious experience of the people according to the moon. The Feast of Tabernacles is a time for rejoicing, but the Feast of Yom Kippur is a time of sorrow and introspection. This was necessary so that the processes of human life could flow and grow rather than stagnate like the Sun, an intellectual process that never changes (absolutism and positivism).  

Rainie & Wellman (2012) make me question the value of academic exploration. It measures relative and self-reported variables (meaningful relationships) by other convoluted and relative terms (online engagement). The constructs are meaningless. What is a "meaningful relationship"? Some may say they have a meaningful relationship with their pet rock. There we have it. Pet rocks do not adulterate human connection!!! Were those relationships started and always kept online? Does Meaningful mean talking about politics and sharing cat pictures, or does it mean giving your friend on X a kidney? Where is the positivist standard of evaluating that defines the subjective construct? Self-report? Dopamine? 

See why the moon must obey the sun? To giants from Socrates to Jung, "meaningful" means intimate. Are we defining the keyboard warriors who like to argue with me as "intimate"? Sure, some of your "friends" must be redefined as "acquaintances" as they are not intimate. However, social pleasantries aside, your friends on Facebook are not helping your psyche grow and are not creating meaningful bonds. They are creating useful bonds. 

So, bring a sacrifice to atone for the meaningless relativism of concept creep lest we redefine man and beast too.