It's a central view of the later Wittgenstein that there can be no such thing as a philosophical theory. I think most analytic philosophers nowadays regards themselves as engaged in precisely the kind of philosophical theory the kind of which Wittgenstein denied.
If Monk is not wrong (perhaps he is), then how do "most analytic philosophers nowadays" reply to Wittgenstein's denial of the possibility, value, and/or meaning of the philosophical theorizing they engage in? On what grounds, contrary to Wittgenstein, do they believe that their theories are meaningful?
I hope to understand how current analytic philosophers, taking Wittgenstein into consideration, give a new account of how the late Wittgenstein is in fact wrong, arguing that it is indeed possible to do meaningful theoretical work in philosophy, including, for example, the work analytic philosophy has produced in the past 10 or so years.