If material equivalence sufficed for concept identity, hyperintensional contexts—where substitution of co-extensive terms fails—would be semantically unintelligible, but they are not.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Concept identity(what gets partially determined by community usage): What makes a concept (like 'water' or 'justice') the particular concept it is, rather than a different one.
Hyperintensional contexts(as used in philosophy of language): Situations where even if two statements mean exactly the same thing logically, they might still be treated differently because of *how* they're structured or expressed—like how 'the morning star' and 'the evening star' refer to the same planet but reveal different information.
Material equivalence(in logic and semantics): When two things refer to or describe the same objects or facts in the world, even if they use completely different words or concepts to do so.
Semantically unintelligible(as used in philosophy of language): Impossible to understand or make meaningful sense of in terms of what the words actually mean.

Based on where you are in your exploration