 Such fine-grained conceptions of meaning are often motivated by the thought that only holistically structured meanings that were so tied to our beliefs or to the inferences that we were disposed to make could adequately serve the purposes of psychological explanation (either to deal with Frege-cases (Bilgrami 1992, 1998), to match the fact that understanding itself is holistic (Brandom 2011: 24; Heal 1994), or to just specify an internalistically determined “narrow” content (Block  1995)).[5]  Most such arguments crucially rely on a sub-argument with something like the following general form: