 It should be noted that value pluralism seems central for the possibility of incomparability. After all, the most direct argument against the possibility that values are incommensurable or incomparable is based on value monism (e.g., Mill 1861 [1979] and Sidgwick 1874 [1981]). Donald Regan, for example, argues that “given any two items (objects, experiences, states of affairs, whatever) sufficiently well specified so that it is apposite to inquire into their (intrinsic) value in the Moorean sense, then either one is better than the other, or the two are precisely equal in value” (Regan 1997, 129).