When it comes to dualism versus neoplatonist privation, are there actually any good arguments at all in favor of neoplatonist privation?
The argument for dualism seems obvious. It is known that some things cause pleasure and other things cause suffering. From these, we derive the existence of Good and Bad. They are thus of equal standing. Why should one of them be considered superior to the other? Why should we grant one existence, but not the other?
That is, dualism should be the standard position. It is up to the neoplatonists to provide proof that Good and Bad are not of equal standing.
But I cannot seem to find any convincing arguments for privation (a heck of a lot of bad ones, though). I mean, even the link above to the Stanford site mentions that the main reason philosopher's moved away from dualism to privation is because they liked the romantic thought of "one God". That's evidently a poor reason. (The Second main reason is that there's little empirical evidence for the cosmologic setup underlying Manichaean Dualism, but note that this argument does not hurt general dualism at all, since general dualism does not adobt the cosmology of the Manichaean dualism).
What are the good arguments in favor of privation?