Williamson (1998; 2002; 2013) defended a version of necessitism according to which necessarily, absolutely every possible object necessarily exists. Although this thesis might appear too strong to accept, it is nevertheless underpinned by a logic-driven methodology that Williamson believes should be observed when pursuing theoretical inquiry. I argue that the logic-driven methodology does not pick out Williamson’s version of necessitism, but an even stronger version thereof. I will then consider three plausible objections against this claim, and find all of them unconvincing. Therefore, either the logic-driven methodology underdetermines the truths of metaphysics, or else, Williamson did not endorse the best form of necessitism available on the logic-driven methodology.