[spodek]

"Evolutionary psychology strikes me as myth-making, not in the pejorative sense but in that it forms an understandable, cohesive, and easily retold story around a bunch of observations."

Perhaps it may serve that purpose, but a major difference is that evolutionary psychology aims to be falsifiable, not based on what an authority says, subject to peer review, etc.

Money didn't exist and now it does. Personally, I find a scientific basis to understanding what happened the most useful foundation to understanding it today.

Sure, I have my shorthand mental models that aren't scientific that serve me sometimes -- I do like old quotes like "money is the root of evil" and Pink Floyd songs -- but I value honing in on one story and trying for accuracy with it.

[spodek]

Speaking of accuracy in stories, I just looked up "money is the root of evil" and it turns out it's a popular misquotation.

According do http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/List_of_misquotations, it's a biblical misquote. The original states it's the love of money that is a problem:

In context: "For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." (1 Timothy 6:10) KJV (The King James Bible)

Interesting irony on accuracy and change of meaning.

[nonzero]

I don't know if you've read the essay, but I couldn't figure out how the author's theory of "ultimate purpose" of money could be falsified. In fact, how is any description of subjective motivation falsifiable? Maybe neuroscience can elaborate on one facet, but in the field of inner human experience, I doubt we'll come up with anything close to what constitutes a theory in the hard sciences.