Chance,

I'd be more than happy to discuss MMT. The monetary system I'm talking about is the one we (and any other currency-issuing nation) already have. At its core, MMT is just a description, (interestingly, just like Gregg was suggesting about the ToK above). In many ways, it's a lot like what psychologists refer to as a token economy, writ large. So much so, that it could make a nice "bridge" between MMT economists and psychologists, IMO.

Not to mention, insofar that people's psychological problems are correlated with economic context, MMT shows precisely why and how that context can be dramatically improved, (and why austerity is utterly unnecessary). 

Crypto, like Bitcoin, isn't really money...more like digital commodities. 

A good layperson's intro, in my opinion, Is Part I of Seven Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economic Policy by Warren Mosler, (pages 13-68). A very easy read. (Mosler actually has an example on page 18 that's essentially a token economy in a household.) Gregg seemed impressed by it. 

Perhaps a separate thread?

~ Jason


    On Saturday, March 3, 2018, 7:22:29 PM EST, Chance McDermott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:  
 
 Hi John,
I’m curious about a layman example of the how the nuanced view of associative learning you describe would differ from the conventional understanding.  For example, I was taught a Pavlovian classical conditioning view of cellular learning.
Jason,  I’m also curious about the monetary system you’re talking about, as my initial reaction was “maybe it’s the ‘smartest way,’ but what is it’s popularity potential amidst a competitive and chaotic crypto environment. 

Best wishes!
-Chance 
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 3, 2018, at 8:48 AM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]> wrote:



John,   This is cool. On thought about word usage. I think that much scientific work is involved in getting the basic description right. It might not be experimentally tested,  which is another layer, but I would say that much of the ToK is about getting the right description down. Of course, if there are ways of achiveving experimental angles, all the better in terms of our depth of knowledge and confidence.
G

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: JOHN TORDAY <[log in to unmask]> 
Date: 3/1/18 5:21 AM (GMT-07:00) 
To: [log in to unmask] 
Subject: Re: The evolution of associative learning: A factor in the Cambrian explosion

Hello ToKers, I wanted to comment on Jason Bessey's post regarding the paper on the evolution of associative learning by way of 'constructive criticism'. On the one hand, the paper is a well developed hypothesisdescribing the putative evolution of a key trait in vertebrate evolution. On the other hand, I don't know how to test it scientifically, which is essential to evidence-based knowledge. Given that the paper appeared in a 'theory-based Journal', and that Darwinian evolution assumes random mutations, the authors weren't held to account for the mechanism involved other than to cite Baldwin or West-Eberhard. And so as not to sound negative, I have alternatively considered the fundamental interrelationship between my hypothesis regarding the evolution of warm bloodedness (endothermy/homeothermy) and Stephen Porges's Polyvagal Theory (see attached). Both have in common the role of physiologic stress causing both the evolution of control of body temperature and the phylogenetic changes in the Sympathetic Nervous System, respectively. And suffice it to say that there are specific molecular homologies between these two major evolutionary progressions and the effect of environmental stress via the cholinergic mechanism (I don't want to get bogged down in the alphabet soup of molecular physiology, so I will respectfully refrain from doing so unless someone's interested in that?). In short, I am saying that without such a reduction to cell biology as the basis for phenotypic evolution of associative learning, the description of the mere description is counter-productive IMO because it is untestable and unrefutable 'just so story'. And at this point, as a 'reality check', I would like to point out that there is a fine balance between the effect of catecholamines on learning versus the fight or flight mechanism that could be discussed in the context of physiologic evolution starting with the unicellular organism and culminating in consciousness as the ultimate selection pressure.

Again, I use this as a talking point for how to potentially advance our discussion of the ToK.

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:34 PM, nysa71 <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hello ToK Society,

Just saw this paper and thought it might be relative to the ToK, particularly Behavioral Investment Theory...

The evolution of associative learning: A factor in the Cambrian explosion

~ Jason Bessey


| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
The evolution of associative learning: A factor in the Cambrian explosion

The evolution of associative learning: A factor in the Cambrian explosion
 |

 |

 |



############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L-SIGNOFF- [log in to unmask] or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi- bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A= 1 


############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] click the following link:http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
  

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1