Abstract: Take an account of property individuation to be hyperintensional just in case that account individuates properties more finely than necessary equivalence. Proponents of hyperintensional accounts of property individuation are generally led to embrace these accounts because of certain phenomena surrounding concepts like meaning, thought, and knowledge. For example, we can think about a triangle being triangular without thinking about a triangle being trilateral. But critics of these accounts continue to maintain that such motivations are only the result of representational differences, as opposed to differences in a way that the world is, or a way that the world could be. In effect, these critics tell us, hyperintensional differences between properties are not real differences. The aim of this paper is to present and then closely examine an argument—call it, ‘the Modal-Separability Argument’—that seems to underlie the rejection of treating hyperintensional differences between properties as real differences.