 Lewis seems more hospitable to hyperintensional approaches, provided they can be ultimately explained in terms of possible worlds and set-theoretic constructions out of them. In Lewis (1986: 49–50), he discusses a hyperintensional “trivially” operator that would apply differently to different necessary truths. In a posthumously published letter (Lewis 2004) he seems to acknowledge that there was more than one distinct impossible fiction, and presumably that “According to fiction \(f, A\)” was hyperintensional (since when \(f\) is an impossible fiction, there will be some impossible claim that is true according to it, but in general not all impossible claims will be).