If x is tied to its properties by the asymmetrical relation of instantiation, then F-ness is a logically prior condition of x's being F, and so x depends on them.

What could motivate such a strange and seemingly incoherent doctrine? One central consideration in its favor derives from the Anselmian definition of God as maximally perfect, as that than which no greater can be conceived. A God who was less than maximally perfect would not be an absolute reality and an appropriate object of worship. A God who was less than ultimate and absolute would be an idol. Now an absolute reality must be a se, from itself, and so not dependent on anything distinct from itself either for its nature or for its existence. If God had properties in the way creatures have th...