 Yablo (2002) argues that imaginative resistance arises due to deviant use of response-dependent descriptive concepts, such as shape. We might thereby experience resistance when we are asked to imagine the beauty and elegance of a monster truck competition or that the five-fingered maple leaf that Sally is holding is oval. Weatherson (2004) goes even further to claim that, alongside deviant attribution of thick moral concepts and deviant evaluative sentences, other triggers of imaginative resistance include sentences expressing deviant epistemic evaluations, attributions of mental states, attributions of mental or linguistic content, deviant use of some shape predicates, some deviant ontological claims, and deviant claims about constitution. For instance, according to Weatherson, we cannot imagine, in an alternative Quixote story of his own concoction, that Quixote’s favorite item of furniture is a television which is for all intents and purposes indistinguishable from a common knife. What counts as a television is tied to certain functional roles and these roles are missing in the story. (See Barnes &amp; Black 2016 and Kim, Kneer, &amp; Stuart 2019 for empirical studies that examine whether the type of the deviant claim—its being counter-evaluative or counter-descriptive—makes a difference in resistance reactions. On the basis of their studies, Black and Barnes come to the conclusion that the type of the claim makes vast individual differences between resistance reactions, while Kim et al. conclude that “imaginative resistance depends on the weirdness of content, not whether the claim is evaluative or descriptive” (2019: 160).)