Money only has value because we as a society have agreed to give those pieces of paper meaning. What a beautiful human gift: to be able to give meaning. We create the value of the most important things on Earth -- family, respect, pride, integrity, love, sex, a kiss, friendship. Like a green bill with a famous dead person on it, these things matter only because we say they do. Unlike the inescapable value of money, it is only our ideals that keep concepts from becoming empty words and actions.
For a time, I feared that Facebook would fetishize the value of the human relation. If friends are a dime a dozen, what is the value of any one person? There is a story of a man in the Netherlands who had the only black tulip in the region. When another was discovered, he paid a fortune to outbid his countrymen for the flower. Then, in front of the crowd, he took the second black tulip known in existence and squashed the life out of it. After all, having the only two of something is not quite the same as having the only one.
I was wrong. Perhaps the digital networks devalued the word "friend," but the way they evolved the concept of friendship is wonderful. Many an economist or government major would tell you that for cooperation there is a need for repeated interactions among the players. Altruism aside, if one feels that they will never benefit from a relationship and that there is no cost associated with rudeness, why put in time and effort to help another? Trust is less important with someone you'll never see again.
For me, Facebook friends are digital neighbors. Regardless of our physical proximity to each other, all interactions on the Internet can be made repeat exchanges. Do a favor for someone today and you can make use of their unique talents for a lifetime to come. Of course they can always say 'no,' but they don't know when they can make use of your experience either. It is only a temporary generational flaw of the digital networks that they do not mention careers on profiles. Soon, we as individuals may have built our own self-sustaining micro-societies complete with businessmen, computer developers, professors and even trail guides. And since these are people one has a shared experience with, there is a higher probability that they will help you reliably.
By no means am I suggesting you should Facebook everyone you meet -- that's just annoying. What I am suggesting is that with the evolution of the digital social networks, there may grow sub-communities that share stake in success, security and entertainment. Services can be obtained through people you trust because of your repeated interactions, and those who default on their social responsibilities will face a reputation cost. As with the evolution of paper money, technology has changed the value of the more random encounters we come across in our daily lives.
But what of our real friends, those who mean infinitely more to us than the service they provide? Do we devalue them by giving their title to so many? I would like to believe that those closest to us can feel the special meaning we give to their company. Perhaps the word 'friend' has been devalued through its overuse, but surely the actual relation is as dependent on our own thoughts and efforts as ever. As for the label, I reserve words such as 'comrade,' so that through the scarcity of use, I can set aside the realest relations of my life.
This does not mean I do not inherently value my Facebook friends -- even without expectation of personal benefit. Our status as digital friends reflects some portion of life that has brought us together. It is precisely because I value a history with these peers that I can feel comfortable continuing a relationship long after a significant interaction. And the world is small enough that paths do cross again; I have yet to have a vacation abroad in which I have not randomly run across an old acquaintance. We already do have a shared stake with this planet. The digital networks are but a new tool to set up communities and ways of influence that better reflect this.
