Abstract
"Neutral monism", a view of the relation between the mental and the physical held among others by Bertrand Russell, was by many of its proponents seen as a more plausible alternative to both idealism and dualism. According to a common objection, however, neutral monism implies that all reality is ultimately of a mental - rather than neutral - nature, and so the position really amounts to a form of panpsychism, idealism or phenomenalism.
I argue that - at least when it comes to an influential formulation of neutral monism expressed in Russell's 1927 book The Analysis of Matter - we have reasons to resist this mentalist suspicion since it presupposes a concept of consciousness which Russell would presumably reject.