for the theoria to impact and constrain the ontology uh so but that's still maybe not what you want and that that's fine yeah but but but one thing i want to say is in this notion again of intelligibility and understanding i think i think the core of neoplatonism comes down to this understanding presupposes that reality is ultimately one because understanding is all right it originally was interstanding and then we turned it into understanding and it's related to sub-stance and all that all that word play but understanding is always here's a bunch of things and here's the unity under them here's a bunch and then here's the unity of the unities and that's why scientists without realizing it are seeking the grand unifying theory why right and there's a presupposition that reality comports right and so i do think that neoplatonism's argument is that understanding and so we use understanding for the cognitive act and intelligibility for the property in the world and they're co-determining i think of them as polar elements within a shared phenomena right that understanding intelligibility pre uh presupposes monism against william james by the way so that's where i'd be in disagreement with james because james thought and this is what i've always and that i've always found problematic in james and i think spinozy just gives the pounding arguments on this right like if you have the two things then you've got to have some third thing that explains the relation and that etc and all that and that that unifying thing is the ultimate and that argue and i think that's the classic neoplatonic insight and so if i'm going to give a qualified thing and it's still not going to satisfy you but but i i i hope you feel it's at least moving uh like we're getting a movement right if mystical experience gives the kind of understanding i was talking about earlier then and if understanding presupposes a kind of monism there is a connection between mysticism as driving understanding and a metaphysics that supports that understanding in or