 The role of conceptual analysis is to show that a putative reduction respects the original meaning of the target expression (Jackson 1998a, 28). A physicalist won’t succeed in accounting for free will if she identifies free will with having a temperature of 37.4º C – such a “reduction” would simply change the subject under discussion. A successful reduction must be answerable to our original shared understanding of the target expression—and elucidating this original understanding just is what conceptual analysis does. So if conceptual analyses are knowable apriori, it follows that metaphysical reductions must always be backed by apriori entailments between the base-level claim (such as a physical description of the world) and the target claim (such as the claim that humans have free will).