been thinking about the semiotics of the eruv while out & about in the city lately, how its representative of certain legalistic cultures' (such as Jewish ones) tenancy to language-lawyer their ancestrally-received wisdom to suit their modern lifestyles, its inherent doublethink

for those unaware, the eruv is a piece of wire stretched between lampposts of much of NYC at the behest of the Orthodox Jewish communities; it forms a loop enclosing many square miles of city blocks, and is used to "extend the private domain" to circumvent shabbat restrictions

for those that follow a strict interpretation of the Torah's teachings, Shabbat, or the Sabbath, is a pretty important part of the practice; on this day, a Jew may not "do work", which includes many activities, such as lighting fires, which, in modern times, includes electricity.

during Shabbat a Jew also faces restrictions on what they may may do outside the home, such as carry objects; this presents difficulties for ex, new parents, as much of modern life takes place in the public sphere. carrying objects is allowed within the "private domain", however

a simple way of resolving this issue is by redefining what the "private domain" entails; the eruv is one such method. by paying the city to allow the communities to erect these domain markers, they can fit the rigors of the Orthodoxy into modern life, w/o taking on undue burdens

this solution is fascinating in its implications; it implies that the critical aspects of the belief system are the specific inherited forms of the commandments, rather than any particular spirit in which they may have been intended; words are redefined to allow certain behaviors

to many outside the community, such as myself, a non-practicing Jew, its clearly this is a ridiculous perversion of the spirit in which the received wisdom was intended, and those that engage in such semantic trickery are flouting the undying meanings of their supposed beliefs

however, they do not see it as such; to those embedded in these belief systems, this sort of contortion is seen as par for the course, a burden they must bear as they try and carry out their people's mission. this has broader implications on these people's general epistemics, too