 Several philosophers have defended non-standard versions of the modal characterization in light of Fine’s putative counterexamples. Edward Zalta (2006) was among the first. He distinguishes between abstract objects (such as numbers and fictional characters) and ordinary objects (such as Socrates). According to Zalta, every object necessarily exists (whether abstract or ordinary), but ordinary objects are not necessarily concrete. Indeed, an ordinary object such as Socrates is concrete in some possible worlds but non-concrete in others. Zalta suggests two separate accounts of essence, one corresponding to abstract objects and the other corresponding to ordinary objects. Here is Zalta’s account of essence for ordinary objects, slightly simplified: