 Because of the difficulties involved in the first two responses, a third response has become popular in recent years (Boolos 1984 and 1985a; Burgess 2004; Cartwright 2001; Rayo and Uzquiano 1999; Uzquiano 2003). This is that the quantifier \(\exists{R}\) is a plural quantifier (and would thus be better written as \(\exists{rr})\) and that plural quantification is ontologically innocent. Therefore  (13)  does not assert the existence of any “set-like” entity over and above the sets in the range of the quantifier \(\forall{x}\). But as we will see in  Section 5,  the claim about ontological innocence is controversial.