  Sylvan’s position on the ontology of values (discussed at length in 1980a, esp. 152ff) draws on the Last Man Example to claim that things can, indeed, be valuable at a time when no valuers exist and extended thought experiments of a similar kind he takes to further establish that things can be valuable in a world wherein no valuer exists at all, though a valuer must exist in some world (1980a, 156, fn 67; cf. also Sylvan and Bennett 1994, 143). Values are, he claims, conceptually dependent on valuers—thus the slogan “no value without valuers” remains true, he contends—and therewith the rock of objectivism is said to be avoided (1980a, 154). Elliot (1980) also contends that a non-objectivist account is sufficient for this kind of value engendered by the last man example, though it is one requiring actual evaluators (“no values without actual valuers”). He goes on to describe a subjectivist account that further links values to valuers in a manner that “makes the valuer the sole determinant of a thing’s value” (1980, 19) with value reduced to valuer evaluations.