{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026373626373626374, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.7, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Ontological Argument Defended

(B) if F is a necessarily exemplified concept then a certain range of attitudes such as total reliance, whole hearted dependence, location of supreme value (abbreviated to RA) is an appropriate range of attitudes to take towards Fs. (C) if RA is an appropriate range of attitudes to take towards Fs, but an inappropriate range of attitudes to take towards Gs, then Fs are ceteris paribus a greater kind of thing than Gs.