{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01440329218106996, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.493333333333333, '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}}
What Shall We Do with Analytic Metaphysics? A Response to McLeod and Parsons

We defend our characterization of non-naturalistic metaphysics. Specifically we question McLeod and Parsons's interpretation of the idea of an auxiliary hypothesis. We further argue that our original article does not require that we abandon debate on important metaphysical issues. What it requires is that we reinterpret some metaphysical issues as conceptual analysis rather than ontological investigation.