I review a widely accepted argument to the conclusion that the contents of our beliefs, desires and other ordinary mental states cannot be causally efficacious in a computational model of the mind. I reply that this argument rests essentially on an assumption about the nature of neural structure that we have no good scientific reason to accept. I conclude that computationalism is compatible with semantic causal efficacy, and that it is an empirical matter whether wide semantic properties are as causally efficacious as they appear to be.