WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.580 What does a grueling sweat drenched professional 00:00:02.580 --> 00:00:06.940 wrestling match have in common with a tiny slice 00:00:06.940 --> 00:00:11.460 of processed American cheese or like a 1995 Nirvana 00:00:11.460 --> 00:00:14.740 box set and a centuries old French farming commune? 00:00:14.779 --> 00:00:17.000 I mean, it sounds like the set up to the world's 00:00:17.000 --> 00:00:19.440 weirdest joke. It really does. And if you're 00:00:19.440 --> 00:00:22.079 looking for some kind of logical real world connection 00:00:22.079 --> 00:00:24.460 between those things, you are going to be searching 00:00:24.460 --> 00:00:27.140 for a very long time. Yeah, you really are. But 00:00:27.140 --> 00:00:28.800 the thing is, if you look at the architecture 00:00:28.800 --> 00:00:32.159 of human language, they all share the exact same 00:00:32.159 --> 00:00:34.539 foundation. It sounds absurd when you list it 00:00:34.539 --> 00:00:36.679 out like that, but you know, that is the bizarre 00:00:36.679 --> 00:00:39.179 beauty of how we use language. We take a single 00:00:39.179 --> 00:00:42.280 concept and we just we stretch it across entirely 00:00:42.280 --> 00:00:45.479 unrelated dimensions of reality. Welcome to today's 00:00:45.479 --> 00:00:47.539 deep dive. We are taking a slightly different 00:00:47.539 --> 00:00:49.659 approach today for you. Instead of a traditional 00:00:49.659 --> 00:00:52.500 narrative or like a single historical event, 00:00:52.899 --> 00:00:56.200 we are exploring a map of human psychology through 00:00:56.200 --> 00:01:00.119 one highly specific, deeply chaotic Wikipedia 00:01:00.119 --> 00:01:03.299 disambiguation page. Oh, I love this one. Yeah. 00:01:03.920 --> 00:01:06.819 The word we are exploring is singles. And our 00:01:06.819 --> 00:01:09.359 mission for you today is to examine how this 00:01:09.359 --> 00:01:12.500 one word fractures into wildly different areas 00:01:12.500 --> 00:01:15.040 of our lives. Right. Spanning pop culture, the 00:01:15.040 --> 00:01:16.959 mechanics of the music industry. High -stakes 00:01:16.959 --> 00:01:19.620 sports. Exactly. And even macroeconomics. OK, 00:01:19.640 --> 00:01:22.239 let's unpack this. The core definition provided 00:01:22.239 --> 00:01:24.299 right at the top of the material is the one we 00:01:24.299 --> 00:01:27.480 all know, right? It simply states, singles are 00:01:27.480 --> 00:01:29.950 people not in a committed relationship. That 00:01:29.950 --> 00:01:32.430 primary definition sets the stage perfectly, 00:01:32.469 --> 00:01:35.049 I think, because it acts as a cultural mirror. 00:01:35.209 --> 00:01:38.030 It reflects how deeply we categorize the concept 00:01:38.030 --> 00:01:41.709 of the one versus the many. To be a single, in 00:01:41.709 --> 00:01:44.129 the human sense, is to be defined entirely by 00:01:44.129 --> 00:01:47.170 what you are not attached to. You are an autonomous 00:01:47.170 --> 00:01:49.909 unit. And from that deeply human starting point, 00:01:49.989 --> 00:01:52.209 that state of being unattached, the psychological 00:01:52.209 --> 00:01:54.390 weight of that word just ripples out into almost 00:01:54.390 --> 00:01:56.709 everything else we build and consume. And what's 00:01:56.709 --> 00:02:00.400 wild is how much global media obsessively reflects 00:02:00.400 --> 00:02:03.439 that specific relationship status back at us. 00:02:03.760 --> 00:02:05.319 Like, if you just look at film and television 00:02:05.319 --> 00:02:08.139 titled Singles, the global footprint is astonishing. 00:02:08.419 --> 00:02:11.039 Oh, it really is. You have a 1984 Australian 00:02:11.039 --> 00:02:14.539 television miniseries. Then you have a British 00:02:14.539 --> 00:02:18.379 sitcom that ran from 88 to 91. Wow. There's a 00:02:18.379 --> 00:02:20.580 Greek TV series literally called S. Wengles, 00:02:20.639 --> 00:02:22.620 but it's spelled with a number one. Oh, that's 00:02:22.620 --> 00:02:26.259 clever. Right. In 2003, there was a massively 00:02:26.259 --> 00:02:29.659 popular South Korean film titled Singles starring 00:02:29.659 --> 00:02:32.319 Jang Jin Young. Yeah, that was huge. And of course, 00:02:32.520 --> 00:02:35.419 Cameron Crowe's iconic 1992 American film set 00:02:35.419 --> 00:02:38.039 in the Seattle grunge scene, which, by the way, 00:02:38.159 --> 00:02:40.099 also gave us that legendary Singles original 00:02:40.099 --> 00:02:42.180 ocean picture soundtrack. An absolute classic. 00:02:42.280 --> 00:02:45.860 Totally. But let me push back on this for a second. 00:02:46.090 --> 00:02:48.250 Because looking at this massive list, I have 00:02:48.250 --> 00:02:51.669 to ask why this word. Is it just me or does the 00:02:51.669 --> 00:02:54.009 fact that so many different countries have shows 00:02:54.009 --> 00:02:57.090 and movies just called singles prove that being 00:02:57.090 --> 00:03:01.030 unattached is like the ultimate default blank 00:03:01.030 --> 00:03:03.770 canvas for human drama? What's fascinating here 00:03:03.770 --> 00:03:05.969 is that single represents a state of transition. 00:03:06.370 --> 00:03:09.370 Okay. And transition is the engine of all storytelling. 00:03:09.810 --> 00:03:13.169 Love, longing, the search for connection. These 00:03:13.169 --> 00:03:16.129 are universal human conditions. Yeah, that makes 00:03:16.129 --> 00:03:18.830 sense. When a filmmaker in South Korea, a TV 00:03:18.830 --> 00:03:21.629 producer in Greece, and Cameron Crowe in Seattle 00:03:21.629 --> 00:03:24.669 all rely on the exact same title, it tells us 00:03:24.669 --> 00:03:27.009 that the unattached individual is an archetype 00:03:27.009 --> 00:03:30.030 we all instantly recognize. Right, like a married 00:03:30.030 --> 00:03:32.870 couple in a movie implies a settled state. Exactly. 00:03:33.370 --> 00:03:36.870 But a single implies motion. They are searching, 00:03:37.090 --> 00:03:39.610 they're failing, they're trying again. It's inherently 00:03:39.610 --> 00:03:41.789 dramatic. They even turned that motion into a 00:03:41.789 --> 00:03:44.210 video game. Oh, right. The developers at Rotobeef 00:03:44.210 --> 00:03:46.469 put out a game called Singles. Flirt up your 00:03:46.469 --> 00:03:49.900 life. Which just feels like a completely bizarre 00:03:49.900 --> 00:03:52.500 escalation it really does we went from watching 00:03:52.500 --> 00:03:55.740 unacatch people on screen to like Actively simulating 00:03:55.740 --> 00:03:58.460 them. It's the gamification of the human relationship 00:03:58.460 --> 00:04:01.599 status It takes this universal usually passive 00:04:01.599 --> 00:04:04.120 viewing experience of romantic comedies or dramas 00:04:04.120 --> 00:04:07.000 and turns the search for connection into an interactive 00:04:07.000 --> 00:04:09.729 puzzle You aren't just watching the unattached 00:04:09.729 --> 00:04:13.590 blank canvas anymore. You are actively maneuvering 00:04:13.590 --> 00:04:18.129 the social mechanics to resolve that single status. 00:04:18.930 --> 00:04:21.290 It highlights how much societal pressure there 00:04:21.290 --> 00:04:24.370 is to literally solve the condition of being 00:04:24.370 --> 00:04:27.790 single. That makes total sense. We view the human 00:04:27.790 --> 00:04:29.990 single as a problem that needs a resolution. 00:04:30.430 --> 00:04:33.870 But how does that psychology shift when we move 00:04:33.870 --> 00:04:36.110 away from human beings searching for a mate, 00:04:36.329 --> 00:04:38.529 and we start talking about the individual artistic 00:04:38.529 --> 00:04:41.589 unit? Oh, that's a big shift. Because the way 00:04:41.589 --> 00:04:44.290 we use the word in the art world feels fundamentally 00:04:44.290 --> 00:04:46.829 different. It absolutely is. We move from the 00:04:46.829 --> 00:04:49.490 sociology of the individual to the commodification 00:04:49.490 --> 00:04:51.730 of art. Right. In human relationships, being 00:04:51.730 --> 00:04:54.110 single is often portrayed as a temporary state, 00:04:54.149 --> 00:04:56.350 like you're looking for a partnership. But in 00:04:56.350 --> 00:04:59.170 art, making something a single is an act of deliberate 00:04:59.170 --> 00:05:01.629 permanent isolation. Here's where it gets really 00:05:01.629 --> 00:05:03.110 interesting. Let's look at the mechanics of the 00:05:03.110 --> 00:05:05.290 music industry. The technical definition of a 00:05:05.290 --> 00:05:07.930 music single is a release that usually has only 00:05:07.930 --> 00:05:11.389 one to three songs. But singles is an incredibly 00:05:11.389 --> 00:05:14.149 frequent title for entire compilation albums. 00:05:14.670 --> 00:05:16.449 And the list and the material spans literally 00:05:16.449 --> 00:05:18.850 every conceivable genre. It's a massive list. 00:05:19.129 --> 00:05:21.449 It's wild. You've got the 95 Nirvana box set. 00:05:21.649 --> 00:05:24.430 We have compilations from the synth pop of Alison 00:05:24.430 --> 00:05:28.360 Moyette in 95 and Deacon Blue in 2006. There's 00:05:28.360 --> 00:05:31.600 the Indie Sounds of Future Islands in 2014, and 00:05:31.600 --> 00:05:34.279 Jimmy Eat World from 2000. Even Japanese Rock, 00:05:34.300 --> 00:05:38.259 right? Yes. Luna Sea in 97. Then you jump to 00:05:38.259 --> 00:05:42.360 Maroon 5 in 2015, New Order in 2005, and Red 00:05:42.360 --> 00:05:46.279 Crayola in 2004. It just keeps going. It really 00:05:46.279 --> 00:05:51.060 does. Suede 2003, The Long Blondes in 2008, The 00:05:51.060 --> 00:05:55.620 Smiths in 95, Travis in 2004. Wow. Despina Vandy 00:05:55.620 --> 00:05:59.939 in 2006, and Fishbone back in 93. And that's 00:05:59.939 --> 00:06:01.399 just some of the compilation. Right, there are 00:06:01.399 --> 00:06:03.779 the EPs and box sets, too. Exactly. You have 00:06:03.779 --> 00:06:06.079 Corey Hart's The Singles in 92, The Strangler's 00:06:06.079 --> 00:06:09.240 Singles, The UA Years in 89, The Melvin's Singles, 00:06:09.339 --> 00:06:11.959 1 through 12 in 97. Oh, yeah. And even super 00:06:11.959 --> 00:06:14.879 recently, Cameron Winters released a Singles 00:06:14.879 --> 00:06:18.459 EP in 2024. And we can't forget the individual 00:06:18.459 --> 00:06:20.939 songs that are just literally titled singles. 00:06:21.779 --> 00:06:24.800 Right. Like the track by E40 and Too Short from 00:06:24.800 --> 00:06:28.500 their 2012 album, History, Function Music. And 00:06:28.500 --> 00:06:31.439 the one by I .B .I. from their 2015 self -titled 00:06:31.439 --> 00:06:34.639 album. Exactly. But I have to point out the irony 00:06:34.639 --> 00:06:37.519 here. It's hilarious that an album named Singles 00:06:37.519 --> 00:06:39.899 is actually a plural collection of things. Yeah. 00:06:40.040 --> 00:06:42.699 It's like throwing a massive party, but naming 00:06:42.699 --> 00:06:45.639 the party people who arrived alone. That is a 00:06:45.639 --> 00:06:47.600 great way to put it. If we connect this to the 00:06:47.600 --> 00:06:50.079 bigger picture, you have to look at why the music 00:06:50.079 --> 00:06:52.339 industry created this concept in the first place. 00:06:52.459 --> 00:06:54.540 Okay, lay it on me. Historically, it was driven 00:06:54.540 --> 00:06:58.160 by the physical limitations of vinyl. A 45 RPM 00:06:58.160 --> 00:07:00.139 record could only hold about three minutes of 00:07:00.139 --> 00:07:02.759 music per side. Right, of course. So the industry 00:07:02.759 --> 00:07:05.860 had to extract the most commercial, catchy piece 00:07:05.860 --> 00:07:08.579 of an artist's work to sell it cheaply and get 00:07:08.579 --> 00:07:10.779 it on the radio. An album is supposed to be an 00:07:10.779 --> 00:07:13.639 ecosystem, you know, a complete thought. But 00:07:13.639 --> 00:07:16.240 the single is pulled out to survive entirely 00:07:16.240 --> 00:07:19.800 on its own merits. It has no intro track to set 00:07:19.800 --> 00:07:23.160 the mood, no deep cuts to support it. It's a 00:07:23.160 --> 00:07:26.360 gladiator thrown into the arena of pop culture. 00:07:26.860 --> 00:07:28.879 So when an artist releases a compilation called 00:07:28.879 --> 00:07:31.300 Singles, they aren't just giving you a playlist. 00:07:31.500 --> 00:07:33.480 They are gathering up all their most successful 00:07:33.480 --> 00:07:36.180 autonomous gladiators and putting them in one 00:07:36.180 --> 00:07:38.839 display case. Precisely. They are stripping away 00:07:38.839 --> 00:07:42.459 the context of the original albums and we actually 00:07:42.459 --> 00:07:44.980 see this exact same behavior in the world of 00:07:44.980 --> 00:07:48.000 gaming and collectibles. Individual trading cards 00:07:48.000 --> 00:07:50.860 sold at hobby stores are called singles. Wait, 00:07:51.079 --> 00:07:53.779 okay. I buy the gladiator theory for a three 00:07:53.779 --> 00:07:56.259 -minute pop song on the radio, but does that 00:07:56.259 --> 00:07:58.579 isolation theory really hold up when we look 00:07:58.579 --> 00:08:02.269 at literal pieces of cardboard? He does. Why 00:08:02.269 --> 00:08:04.529 do we use the same word for a holographic trading 00:08:04.529 --> 00:08:06.949 card? Because it's the exact same psychological 00:08:06.949 --> 00:08:09.509 mechanism of extracting value. Think about how 00:08:09.509 --> 00:08:11.329 trading cards are sold. You buy a sealed booster 00:08:11.329 --> 00:08:14.149 pack. Right. That pack is the ecosystem, just 00:08:14.149 --> 00:08:16.149 like a studio album. But let's be honest, most 00:08:16.149 --> 00:08:18.129 of the cards in that pack are filler. Yeah, they're 00:08:18.129 --> 00:08:20.069 the ones you just toss in a shoe box. Exactly. 00:08:20.509 --> 00:08:23.970 They are the album tracks you skip. But the rare 00:08:23.970 --> 00:08:27.250 holographic card, that's the hip hop song. Oh, 00:08:27.250 --> 00:08:29.410 wow. I see where you're going with this. So what 00:08:29.410 --> 00:08:32.289 does a collector do? They extract it. They put 00:08:32.289 --> 00:08:35.289 it in a hard plastic sleeve, completely divorcing 00:08:35.289 --> 00:08:37.809 it from the pack it came in, and a hobby store 00:08:37.809 --> 00:08:40.549 sells it on its own for a premium. So it becomes 00:08:40.549 --> 00:08:43.950 a single. Exactly. We are taking the prized item 00:08:43.950 --> 00:08:47.710 and isolating it for pure, undistracted appreciation, 00:08:48.289 --> 00:08:50.710 completely free of the filler. We isolate the 00:08:50.710 --> 00:08:52.649 prized item so we don't have to deal with the 00:08:52.649 --> 00:08:55.070 noise around it. That is a brilliant way to frame 00:08:55.070 --> 00:08:58.000 it. But if music and trading cards isolate a 00:08:58.000 --> 00:09:00.840 prized item for appreciation, the sports world 00:09:00.840 --> 00:09:03.779 uses the exact same word to isolate the human 00:09:03.779 --> 00:09:06.039 body. Right, to test its absolute physical and 00:09:06.039 --> 00:09:07.759 mental limits. Let's talk about the athletic 00:09:07.759 --> 00:09:10.179 definition. In sports, you have men's singles 00:09:10.179 --> 00:09:12.480 and women's singles. And this applies to racket 00:09:12.480 --> 00:09:15.220 sports like tennis, badminton, pickleball, squash, 00:09:15.740 --> 00:09:18.379 and table tennis. Lots of racket sports. Yeah, 00:09:18.419 --> 00:09:20.059 and it even applies to professional wrestling 00:09:20.059 --> 00:09:22.500 when it's a one -on -one match. You also have 00:09:22.500 --> 00:09:24.700 single skating. which is the figure skating discipline, 00:09:25.919 --> 00:09:28.639 and match play in golf. But I want to contrast 00:09:28.639 --> 00:09:31.200 this with another sports definition that completely 00:09:31.200 --> 00:09:34.059 flips the script. OK, what's that? In baseball, 00:09:34.759 --> 00:09:38.580 a single is when a batter reaches first base 00:09:38.580 --> 00:09:41.899 due to successful contact with the ball. Now, 00:09:41.960 --> 00:09:45.240 a single in baseball is the absolute foundational 00:09:45.240 --> 00:09:47.460 building block of an inning. Right. It's a stepping 00:09:47.460 --> 00:09:50.269 stone. Exactly. You hit a single so the next 00:09:50.269 --> 00:09:52.610 player can hit a double and bring you home. But 00:09:52.610 --> 00:09:56.129 a single in tennis or figure skating is the entire 00:09:56.129 --> 00:09:58.490 universe of the competition. Yeah, that's true. 00:09:58.570 --> 00:10:00.429 One is a fraction of the goal, and the other 00:10:00.429 --> 00:10:03.110 is the whole mountain. Why do we use the same 00:10:03.110 --> 00:10:05.690 word for such wildly different athletic concepts? 00:10:06.049 --> 00:10:08.429 This raises an important question about how we 00:10:08.429 --> 00:10:11.190 define individual effort versus collective success. 00:10:11.330 --> 00:10:13.590 OK. Let's look at the psychology of the tennis 00:10:13.590 --> 00:10:16.990 player first. In racket sports or professional 00:10:16.990 --> 00:10:19.889 wrestling, singles means bearing the entire weight 00:10:19.889 --> 00:10:23.190 of failure or victory without a safety net. Because 00:10:23.190 --> 00:10:25.730 there is no one to pass the ball to. Precisely. 00:10:26.230 --> 00:10:28.909 If you lose a single squash match, it is entirely 00:10:28.909 --> 00:10:32.429 on your shoulders. The word implies supreme isolation 00:10:32.429 --> 00:10:36.070 under extreme psychological pressure. It is heroic 00:10:36.070 --> 00:10:39.740 self -reliance. Wow. But in baseball, the word 00:10:39.740 --> 00:10:42.600 single represents the minimum successful unit 00:10:42.600 --> 00:10:45.279 of offensive connection. It's the smallest increment 00:10:45.279 --> 00:10:48.000 of success. Like, you didn't hit it out of the 00:10:48.000 --> 00:10:50.039 park, but you didn't strike out either. You got 00:10:50.039 --> 00:10:52.860 a single. And more importantly, in baseball, 00:10:53.000 --> 00:10:56.139 the single is the start of a sequence. It implies 00:10:56.139 --> 00:10:58.679 a mandatory connection to the batters who will 00:10:58.679 --> 00:11:01.059 follow. You cannot win a baseball game with one 00:11:01.059 --> 00:11:02.720 single. Right. It requires the team to build 00:11:02.720 --> 00:11:05.580 upon it. Exactly. But in tennis, the single is 00:11:05.580 --> 00:11:08.350 the entirety of the narrative. It's fascinating 00:11:08.350 --> 00:11:11.110 how the exact same word dictates entirely different 00:11:11.110 --> 00:11:13.450 psychological states for the athletes involved. 00:11:13.889 --> 00:11:16.610 One athlete hears single and knows they are completely 00:11:16.610 --> 00:11:19.169 alone in the arena and the other hears single 00:11:19.169 --> 00:11:21.269 and knows they just did their part for the collective 00:11:21.269 --> 00:11:24.240 machine. Perfectly said. It really makes you 00:11:24.240 --> 00:11:27.460 realize how much invisible weight a word carries 00:11:27.460 --> 00:11:29.679 depending on the shape of the court or, you know, 00:11:29.820 --> 00:11:31.500 the field you're standing on. Absolutely. Now, 00:11:31.659 --> 00:11:34.580 let's move from the individual in athletic action 00:11:34.580 --> 00:11:38.240 to how the concept of a single manifests in our 00:11:38.240 --> 00:11:40.460 physical daily consumption. Okay. Because this 00:11:40.460 --> 00:11:42.440 is where the concept touches everyone's life. 00:11:42.720 --> 00:11:44.740 Even if you never pick up a tennis racket or 00:11:44.740 --> 00:11:46.519 collect a vinyl record. Right. We are entering 00:11:46.519 --> 00:11:50.159 the realm of commodifying the one For mass consumption. 00:11:50.399 --> 00:11:52.980 Yes. We've got a list of physical items that 00:11:52.980 --> 00:11:56.600 have co -opted this word. Kraft Singles, the 00:11:56.600 --> 00:11:59.500 globally recognized brand of individually packaged 00:11:59.500 --> 00:12:03.440 cheese product slices. A classic. Right. Then 00:12:03.440 --> 00:12:06.200 there's Kenco Singles, which is a single serve 00:12:06.200 --> 00:12:09.139 coffee brewing system. We also have miniature 00:12:09.139 --> 00:12:11.860 alcohol bottles, which are specifically sized 00:12:11.860 --> 00:12:15.340 at exactly 50 to 60 milliliters. And then there's 00:12:15.340 --> 00:12:17.960 the financial definition, United States one dollar 00:12:17.960 --> 00:12:20.169 bills. particularly when you were requesting 00:12:20.169 --> 00:12:22.950 change from, or implicitly comparing them to, 00:12:23.230 --> 00:12:25.269 larger denomination bills. Yeah, can I get some 00:12:25.269 --> 00:12:27.789 singles? Exactly. So what does this all mean 00:12:27.789 --> 00:12:30.289 for you? Think about the mechanics of your daily 00:12:30.289 --> 00:12:33.509 life. When you hand a cashier a $20 bill and 00:12:33.509 --> 00:12:35.730 ask for singles, you're asking to break down 00:12:35.730 --> 00:12:38.129 value into its most granular, manageable form. 00:12:38.330 --> 00:12:40.570 Isn't that exactly what Kraft and Kenko did with 00:12:40.570 --> 00:12:43.970 cheese and coffee? They took a bulk item, like 00:12:43.970 --> 00:12:47.250 a block of dairy or a massive pot of coffee and 00:12:47.250 --> 00:12:49.950 made it hyper convenient by breaking it down 00:12:49.950 --> 00:12:53.610 into an isolated single use format. It is the 00:12:53.610 --> 00:12:56.370 ultimate expression of consumer control. Oh, 00:12:56.450 --> 00:12:59.190 I like that. The single in economics and physical 00:12:59.190 --> 00:13:02.330 consumption is entirely about precise measurement 00:13:02.330 --> 00:13:04.690 and eliminating friction. Right. You don't have 00:13:04.690 --> 00:13:07.029 to measure anything. Exactly. Look at the miniature 00:13:07.029 --> 00:13:09.210 liquor bottles you mentioned. The fact that they 00:13:09.210 --> 00:13:12.529 are exactly 50 to 60 milliliters isn't arbitrary. 00:13:12.669 --> 00:13:15.830 It is a highly regulated, mathematically precise 00:13:15.830 --> 00:13:18.850 isolation of a consumable. That makes total sense. 00:13:19.049 --> 00:13:21.830 When we want convenience in modern society, we 00:13:21.830 --> 00:13:24.190 demand that the world be broken down into singles. 00:13:24.730 --> 00:13:26.909 We don't want to slice the cheese. That requires 00:13:26.909 --> 00:13:29.669 effort and a knife. And cleaning the knife. Exactly. 00:13:29.669 --> 00:13:31.610 We want the craft single. We don't want to brew 00:13:31.610 --> 00:13:33.929 a whole pot and risk wasting it. Right. We want 00:13:33.929 --> 00:13:36.330 the Kenco single. And we don't want the rigidity 00:13:36.330 --> 00:13:40.049 of a $20 bill. We want 20 individual fluidly 00:13:40.049 --> 00:13:43.629 maneuverable units of currency. We want the autonomy 00:13:43.629 --> 00:13:47.250 to use exactly what we need when we need it without 00:13:47.250 --> 00:13:49.230 committing to the whole block of cheese or the 00:13:49.230 --> 00:13:52.740 whole $20. Yes. Honestly, circles right back 00:13:52.740 --> 00:13:54.580 to the human relationship definition we started 00:13:54.580 --> 00:13:57.019 with, doesn't it? It truly does. Whether you 00:13:57.019 --> 00:13:59.720 are talking about dating, buying coffee, or carrying 00:13:59.720 --> 00:14:03.200 cash, the single format allows you to engage 00:14:03.200 --> 00:14:05.779 with the world without committing to the larger, 00:14:06.080 --> 00:14:09.679 heavier entity. It is freedom through isolation. 00:14:10.460 --> 00:14:12.259 I love how all these threads tie back to human 00:14:12.259 --> 00:14:15.100 autonomy. But before we wrap up, we have to talk 00:14:15.100 --> 00:14:17.460 about the geographic anomaly included on this 00:14:17.460 --> 00:14:19.759 disambiguation page. Oh yes, the geographical 00:14:19.759 --> 00:14:23.419 twist. Right, because amidst all this deep psychology 00:14:23.419 --> 00:14:26.720 about dating, music, sports, and economics, there 00:14:26.720 --> 00:14:30.049 is a physical place on the map. Singles. Singles. 00:14:30.129 --> 00:14:32.309 It is a commune in the Puit de Dôme département 00:14:32.309 --> 00:14:34.350 in central France. I am so glad we are touching 00:14:34.350 --> 00:14:36.649 on this because it shows the delightful randomness, 00:14:36.929 --> 00:14:39.409 like the sheer chaotic beauty of human language. 00:14:39.649 --> 00:14:43.190 It really does. You have a centuries old French. 00:14:43.470 --> 00:14:46.529 farming commune sharing the exact same localized 00:14:46.529 --> 00:14:49.509 name as American dollar bills and individually 00:14:49.509 --> 00:14:51.990 wrapped American cheese products. It's hilarious. 00:14:52.269 --> 00:14:55.110 It's a total linguistic coincidence, obviously, 00:14:55.309 --> 00:14:57.330 stemming from entirely different etymological 00:14:57.330 --> 00:15:00.710 roots. But it highlights exactly why a disambiguation 00:15:00.710 --> 00:15:03.429 page is necessary in the first place. Human language 00:15:03.429 --> 00:15:06.450 is inherently messy. It overlaps. The massive 00:15:06.450 --> 00:15:08.429 traffic jam of meaning. And that's the journey 00:15:08.429 --> 00:15:10.409 we've been on today. We started this deep dive 00:15:10.409 --> 00:15:13.289 looking at a simple Wikipedia page. And we watched 00:15:13.289 --> 00:15:16.210 one word connect the universal drama of unattached 00:15:16.210 --> 00:15:20.750 lovers. A 1995 Nirvana box set, a grueling badminton 00:15:20.750 --> 00:15:23.549 match, the hyper -convenience of a 50 -milliliter 00:15:23.549 --> 00:15:26.289 bottle of liquor, and a tiny French commune. 00:15:26.429 --> 00:15:28.809 It is a staggering map of human activity, and 00:15:28.809 --> 00:15:31.460 it's all tethered to six letters. The core takeaway 00:15:31.460 --> 00:15:34.159 here is just how much heavy lifting this one 00:15:34.159 --> 00:15:36.919 concept does for our brains. The next time you 00:15:36.919 --> 00:15:39.460 interact with any single in your life, whether 00:15:39.460 --> 00:15:42.059 you're asking a part tender to break a 20, stepping 00:15:42.059 --> 00:15:44.379 up to the plate to hit a baseball or screaming 00:15:44.379 --> 00:15:49.320 Cameron Crowe's 1992 film, recognize how deeply 00:15:49.320 --> 00:15:52.659 our society relies on this concept to organize 00:15:52.659 --> 00:15:55.639 our lives. Absolutely. We desperately need the 00:15:55.639 --> 00:15:57.960 concept of the isolated single to make sense 00:15:57.960 --> 00:16:01.750 of the overwhelming chaotic hole. And that leads 00:16:01.750 --> 00:16:04.330 to a rather profound question about where we 00:16:04.330 --> 00:16:07.169 are heading. We've spent this entire discussion 00:16:07.169 --> 00:16:10.029 exploring how humanity is obsessed with extracting 00:16:10.029 --> 00:16:12.210 the individual from the group. Single slices 00:16:12.210 --> 00:16:14.549 of cheese, single pop songs pulled from albums, 00:16:15.029 --> 00:16:17.730 single athletes standing alone on a court. But 00:16:17.730 --> 00:16:20.029 as we move into a future defined by constant 00:16:20.029 --> 00:16:22.289 digital connection, artificial intelligence, 00:16:22.470 --> 00:16:24.830 and perhaps even neural link technology, where 00:16:24.830 --> 00:16:26.909 our thoughts are constantly networked with a 00:16:26.909 --> 00:16:28.750 broader hive mind. Right, where everything is 00:16:28.750 --> 00:16:32.389 connected. Exactly. of a single eventually become 00:16:32.389 --> 00:16:35.190 obsolete. If the boundaries between the individual 00:16:35.190 --> 00:16:38.190 and the collective completely dissolve, we might 00:16:38.190 --> 00:16:41.309 lose the very word we use to define our own autonomy. 00:16:41.710 --> 00:16:44.470 Now that is something to mull over. Next time 00:16:44.470 --> 00:16:46.929 you unwrap a single slice of cheese, ask yourself 00:16:46.929 --> 00:16:49.389 if you're enjoying a convenience or holding on 00:16:49.389 --> 00:16:52.269 to a relic of an isolated past that is rapidly 00:16:52.269 --> 00:16:54.389 disappearing. It makes you look at cheese very 00:16:54.389 --> 00:16:56.629 differently. It really does. Thank you for joining 00:16:56.629 --> 00:16:59.169 us on this deep dive into the map of human language. 00:16:59.419 --> 00:17:00.360 Catch you next time.