Localization of cognitive functions in the brain does allow one to distinguish between psychological theories.

(2006, this issue) claim is clear and straightforward: " ... No functional neuroimaging research to date has yielded data that can be used to distinguish between psychological theories " (p. 2). This claim is accompanied by equally clear disclaimers. One of them is that the theories to be taken into consideration must be " ... expressed solely at the psychological level " (p. 323). In Coltheart's (2006, this issue) view, that rules out those studies of functional brain imaging which aim to localize cognitive functions in specific brain regions. In his words, " ... That is a different enterprise from seeking to distinguish between competing psychological theories " (p. 323). The first observation that comes to mind is that, by emphasizing that to date no functional neuroimaging research has been successful in distinguishing between competing psychological theories, Coltheart (2006, this issue) has chosen a rather easy task, as he himself is ready to concede. It might well be that to date researchers have not been smart enough to reach that goal, but one hopes they will get smarter in the future. No doubt, a much more ambitious task would be to try to demonstrate that functional neuroimaging research will never be able to distinguish between psychological theories (e.g., Henson, 2005). Here I will argue that, in spite of the fact that the disclaimers and the time limits have apparently rendered Coltheart's (2006, this issue) task much easier, his claim can be shown to be dubious at best, likely wrong. To begin with, it is not that simple to establish whether a theory is expressed solely at a psychological level. Let us take a theory that tries to explain why neglect, a deficit by which patients tend to ignore stimuli that appear on the side of space opposite to their lesion (e.g., Mesulam, 1999), occurs much more frequently, perhaps only, after damage to the right than to the left posterior parietal lobe. This theory has been around for a quarter of a century (e.g., De Renzi, 1982) and says that orienting spatial attention to the right side of space is governed by two mechanisms, whereas orienting attention to the left side of space is governed by one mechanism only. In this form, the theory is expressed at a purely psychological level. I believe its nature does not change much if one adds that the two mechanisms for orienting attention to the …