D. M. Armstrong adopted fictionalism about these entities in arguing that objects are “aspects of, abstractions (-5[1])from” facts. In that book, Armstrong argues for a “combinatorial” view of these entities. (15[1])Accessibility relations between these entities (15[2])can impact (15[3])truth (15[1])values in relational semantics. (15[1])These entities are maximally connected (15[1])objects in concretist (15[1])definitions of them, which are opposed by Alvin Plantinga’s (15[1])(*) abstractionist views. (-5[2])These entities were popularized to provide an extensional semantics (10[1])to modal (10[1])logic since modal operators can be (-5[1])regarded (10[1])as quantifiers over (10[1])these entities. (10[1]-5[1])A “plurality” (10[1]-5[1])of these (10[1])entities (10[1])exist (10[1])according to David Lewis. (10[5])Rigid (-5[1])designators (-5[3])refer to the same thing across (10[1]-5[1])all of (-5[1])these entities. (-5[1])For (10[2])10 points, Gottfried Leibniz (10[1]-5[2])argued (10[1])that we live (10[1])in (10[1])the best (10[1])of (10[1])what entities? (10[2])■END■ (10[10])