<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
<front><journal-meta><journal-title-group><journal-title>Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Spolecznej</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn>2082-3304</issn></journal-meta><article-meta><title-group><article-title>God’s Monism: A Further Reply to Beata Polanowska-Sygulska</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Henry Hardy</surname></name></contrib></contrib-group><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.36280/AFPiFS.2020.3.130</article-id><volume>24</volume><issue>3</issue><pub-date><year>2020</year></pub-date><fpage>130</fpage><lpage>132</lpage><abstract><p>Against Beata Polanowksa-Sygulska (BP-S), I insist on the incompatibility between the pluralism of comprehensive world-views and belief in the monist, universalist tenets of the principal world religions, noting that God the Father and God the Son were both monists. I argue that my position is entailed by Isaiah Berlin’s rejection of the unique truth of any one comprehensive outlook, and that both Berlin and BP-S confuse toleration with acceptance. I reject the charges that my position is monistic, and that I give insufficient attention to conflict within individual values, which can in any case be treated as conflict between values.</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>God</kwd><kwd>monism</kwd><kwd>pluralism</kwd><kwd>religion</kwd><kwd>Isaiah Berlin Language: English</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body /></article>