 It might appear that we individuate propositions more finely than facts: for example, one might argue that the fact that Hesperus is bright is the same fact as the fact that Phosphorus is bright, but that the propositions in question are different (see on this point Künne 2003: 10–12; Candlish &amp; Damnjanovic 2018: 266–7). The identity theorist has a number of strategies in response to this objection. One would be simply to deny it, and maintain that facts are individuated as finely as propositions: if one is a supporter of the Fregean version of the identity theory, this is likely to be one’s response (see, e.g., Dodd 2008a: 90–3). Alternatively, one might respond by saying that, if there is a good point hereabouts, at best it tells only against the Fregean and Russellian versions of the identity theory, not against the hybrid version. The identity theory in the hybrid version can agree that we sometimes think of facts as extensional, reference-level entities and sometimes also individuate propositions or proposition-like entities intensionally. Arguably, these twin points do indeed tell against either a strict Fregean or a strict Russellian version of the identity theory: they tell against the strict Fregean position because, as well as individuating facts intensionally, we also, sometimes, individuate facts extensionally; and they tell against the strict Russellian position because, as well as individuating facts extensionally, we also, sometimes, individuate facts intensionally. But it is plausible that the hybrid version of the identity theory is not touched by the objection, because that version of the theory accommodates propositionally structured and factual entities at both levels of sense and reference, though different sorts of these entities at these different levels—either propositions at the level of sense and correlative proposition-like entities at the level of reference or vice versa, and similarly, mutatis mutandis, for facts and fact-like entities. It will follow, then, for this version of the identity theory, that Fregean thoughts and Russellian propositions are available, if true, to be identical with the factual entities of the appropriate level (sense and reference, respectively), and the individuation problem will not then, it seems, arise. Propositions or propositionally structured entities will be individuated just as finely as we want them to be individuated, and at each level of resolution there will be facts or fact-like entities, individuated to the same resolution, for them to be identical with, if  true.[15]