The philosophical community is far from unanimous in its attitude toward possible-worlds semantics. One faction, with Jaakko Hintikka as its most creative and prolific spokesman, regards the possible-worlds apparatus as helpful for achieving clarification, illumination, and perhaps solution to various traditional problems — problems associated with modality, psychological attitudes and the objects of such attitudes, identity and individuation, and the relationships among various "kinds" of entities. Yet there is an opposing sentiment, one which is skeptical that anything philosophically valuable can be achieved with the aid of such metaphysically suspicious items as are employed by the possible-worlds theorist. Completeness results and formally adequate truth theories for intensional languages are one thing; but perennial problems are not to be illuminated by supplanting them with even greater problems.