Transplant' thought-experiments, in which the cerebrum is moved from one body to another have featured in a number of recent discussions in the personal identity literature. Once taken as offering confirmation of some form of psychological continuity theory of identity, arguments from Marya Schechtman and Kathleen Wilkes have contended that this is not the case. Any such apparent support is due to a lack of detail in their description or a reliance on predictions that we are in no position to make. I argue that the case against them rests on two serious misunderstandings of the operation of thought-experiments, and that even if they do not ultimately support a psychological continuity theory, they do major damage to that theory's opponents.Section 1: The Transplant 'Transplant' thought-experiments, in which the cerebrum is moved from one body to another have featured in a number of recent discussions in the personal identity literature. Although they are different from the traditional 'body-swap' thought-experiments like the one with which Locke started the modern debate in that they envisage the part of the brain that supports distinctive psychology being transferred rather than just the psychology itself, they have usually been used in a similar role. That is, they are presented as offering confirmation to some form of psychological continuity theory of identity (PCT) which holds your continued existence as the person you are to be a matter of the persistence of your distinctive psychology, 1 rather than the persistence of the organism that is your body. But recent arguments have contended that this is not the case. Any such apparent support founders due to a lack of detail in their description, or a reliance on predictions that we are in no position to make. I wish to argue that the case against them is unsuccessful and even if they do not ultimately support a PCT, they stand to do major damage to that theory's opponents.