A final criticism of the enactive approach is that it is empirically falsified by evidence for the DSM (see the commentaries on O’Regan &amp; Noë 2001; Clark 2009: chap. 8; and the essays collected in Gangopadhyay et al. 2010): the bond it posits between what we see and what we do is much too tight to comport with what neuroscience has to tells us about their functional relations.