Abstract
In his primary thesis on the purely perceptual-cognitive nature of movement control, F. Mechsner (2004) entirely neglects, or in fact negates, the influences of action on perception. In this commentary, the author follows the logical steps of Mechsner, illustrates what he conceives to be an error in Mechsner's reasoning, and synthesizes those arguments in favor of a hypothesis of a system of equivalent elements (senses and effectors) in interaction.