Harris argues further that 
although a sensory harmony 
between the visual scene and 
Stratton's feet and lower 
extremities was achieved, it did 
so only because the feet were 
visible. Such harmony was 
achieved because the felt 
position of his feet came to 
match the seen position, not 
because of any change in visual 
perception. As Stratton put it, "I 
could at length feel my feet 
strike against the seen floor, 
although the floor was seen on 
the opposite side of the field of 
vision from that to which at 
the beginning of the 
experiment I had referred these 
tactual sensations."

    By contrast, Stratton asserts 
that "shoulders and head, 
which under the 
circumstances could never be 
directly seen, kept the old 
localization they had had in 
normal vision." If legs and 
torso were felt to match the 
perceived orientation of the 
scene while head and 
shoulders did not, would not 
that imply a misperception of 
the orientation of the head on 
the body? Thus Harris is here 
offering an explanation of 
Stratton’s frequent experience 
that he was viewing an upright 
scene from an inverted position 
of his head and shoulders. 
Similarly, Harris argues that, if 
Kohler’s subjects adapted to 
reversal by coming to feel that 
their hands were actually 
where the reversed visual 
information reported them to 
be, the subjects could correctly 
judge that the curves of a 3 were 
closer to their right hand than 
to their left, while nonetheless 
continuing to see the 3 as 
backward.