The paper investigates Gyula Klima’s reconstruction of Aquinas argument for the immateriality of the intellect by the concept of human thought and its success to avoid the Content Fallacy. This fallacy, which is coined by Robert Pasnau, describes an illicit inference from a description of the nature of a thought, to what a thought represents, its content. The focus will be on a debate between Klima and Pasnau in Proceedings of the Society for Medieval Logic and Metaphysics, but also on Adam Wood’s critique of Klima. The paper concludes that if Klima is interpreted correctly, the argument is valid and Klima’s reconstruction of Aquinas argument does not fall victim to the Content Fallacy.