 Not everyone will agree that each additional turtle theory is more objectionable than the last, since the extra things being postulated are of the same kind (world turtles) as the previous theory already countenanced. David Lewis (1973, 87), e.g., held that while we should prefer theories that are more qualitatively parsimonious—they postulate fewer kinds of thing than their rivals—there is no reason at all to prefer theories that are merely more quantitatively parsimonious—they postulate fewer things of the same kind as their rivals. This is controversial, however, and Nolan (1997) argues that quantitative parsimony is a genuine reason to prefer a theory. If Nolan is correct, the four turtle theory is indeed worse than the three turtle theory, the ten turtle theory worse still, and the infinite turtle theory worse (other things being equal) than any finite turtle theory.