 Complete teleosemantic theories not only say how the content of a state R is determined, given that R is a representation (thereby answering the content-determination question), they also say what it takes for R to qualify as a representation in the first place (thereby answering the representational status question). Hence, such theories entail claims about which systems count as possessing representational states, and which do not. Accordingly, they can be criticized as being too restrictive or too liberal (or as too restrictive in certain respects and too liberal in others). The Swampman objection, for example, aims to show that standard teleosemantic theories are too restrictive in one respect, since they entail that Swampman does not qualify as a representational system, even though he should.