I began by contrasting a taxonomic approach to the vestibular system with the structural approach I have taken in the bulk of this commentary. I then provided an analysis of perspectival structure. Employing that analysis and following the structural approach, I proposed three lines of empirical investigation that would selectively manipulate and measure vestibular processing and perspectival structure.
Day & Fitzpatrick (2005) quip that vestibular processes provide a “silent sense” (see also §2.2.1 of the target article). I suggested at the outset that (following the taxonomic approach) it might be surprisingly difficult to say with any precision why vestibular processing provides a sense of its very own. But even if it is true, that is, if the experiments described yield the expected results, they would show that vestibular processing is hardly silent. Indeed, each of the proposed lines of investigation would be a step towards a better understanding of how vestibular processes affect myriad forms of perspectival structure, all of which would further demonstrate the centrality of vestibular processing to our experiential life. In any case, my hope is that these remarks display the extent to which I have found Lenggenhager and Lopez’s work to be not only inspirational, but also a rich and fruitful avenue for interdisciplinary research into the structural features of conscious experience.