Literal Perceptual Inference

In this paper, I argue that theories of perception that appeal to Helmholtz’s idea of unconscious inference (“Helmholtzian” theories) should be taken literally, i.e. that the inferences appealed to in such theories are inferences in the full sense of the term, as employed elsewhere in philosophy and in ordinary discourse. In the course of the argument, I consider constraints on inference based on the idea that inference is a deliberate acton, and on the idea that inferences depend on the syntactic structure of representations. I argue that inference is a personal-level but sometimes unconscious process that cannot in general be distinguished from association on the basis of the structures of the representations over which it’s defined. I also critique arguments against representationalist interpretations of Helmholtzian theories, and argue against the view that perceptual inference is encapsulated in a module

Ricardian political economy and the 'varieties of capitalism' approach : specialization, trade and comparative institutional advantage

The ‘varieties of capitalism’ approach offers key insights into the institutional embeddedness of economic experiences. It performs an important function in providing a conceptual framework for empirical analyses of the way in which the economy both manifests, and itself is a manifestation of, a whole series of different experiences. However, I argue that the Ricardian themes evident in Hall and Soskice’s Varieties of Capitalism limit the potential effectiveness of the empirical analyses that the approach makes possible. Within the context of this latent Ricardianism, the economy is understood to be international, and the important differences within the economic system are those between different national ‘models’. I expose such assumptions to critical scrutiny, both analytical and empirical, before offering the outline of an alternative basis on which to ground the ‘varieties of capitalism’ approach. In contrast to the major themes of the Ricardian tradition, I argue for an approach that is sensitive to the social relations of production, the study of which requires political economists to transcend the artificial reification of ‘the national’ as a discrete unit of economic analysis