(As with tu quoque replies generally, the rejoinder from gunk leaves open what went "wrong" in the original argument of 14 16.[47]) But the priority monist can point to some crucial differences between gunk and junk that arguably justify only recognizing the metaphysical possibility of the former.
The monist cannot accommodate that point, as the monist can only consider the quantity of the value, not its distribution, and so we are at an impasse.
Though of course the monist need not be an idealist the point is rather that the idealist is likely to be a monist.
While it would be going too far to claim that Plato, Aristotle, Theophrastus, and the ancient thinkers who follow their broad view of Parmenides as a generous monist got Parmenides right on all points, nonetheless the impulse toward "correcting" (or just ignoring) the ancient evidence for Presocratic thought has in this case gone too far.
Swanton's point is that the only explanation the monist has is that different degrees of value merit different responses.
On a monist view, the only fundamental entities there are are spacetime points—simple particulars that are called "space-time points" simply because they instantiate spatiotemporal relations.
From our point of view, there is regret, and the monist can explain why that is without appealing to irrationality.
But there becomes a point somewhere, and it could be a debate monist many participants about where that line in the sand is.
The point is to demonstrate, one final time, how accommodating the neutral monist framework is, and how little of that which may seem most characteristic about the neutral monist doctrines on record is really part of neutral monism.
While it is disputable whether the Danish conception of the nation is predominantly ethnic or civic (cf. Mouritsen & Olsen, 2013), it relies on a monist idea(l) of society in which Danish norms and values constitute the central reference point by which a political community is preserved and reproduced (Hedetoft, 2010; Jensen, 2014; Mouritsen, 2006).
The subsequent sections on substance and the ego point to further consequences of the empiricist point of view adopted by the mainstream neutral monists.
