The issue of the psychic accretion is most pressing. The ontology expressed needs clarity. The psychic accretions are formed of pneuma, which is information essentially. This however leads to a dualism, it leaves us with substrate of physicality which the pneuma is attached to. In a way we have recreated the Cartesian wheel for the pneuma is in a sense no more that res cogitans and the substrate res extensa. This is obviously unacceptable, however what we should note here is that we have the manifestation of this dualism, it is how things appear to be. This manifestation has the character of a φantasy -it is impossible to say that it is definitely not the case. Opposed to this of course is the manifestation of the unity whose φantasy shows itself in the concept of existence a la Spinoza
But then how is anything outside of the pneuma? For anything within consciousness has some quality of being-comprehended. The necessary spatiality and temporality of things is a manifestation itself, it is one more φantasy. That is, that transcendental idealism or realism is true are both φantasies.
Truth is not within our reach, there are only manifestations. The manifestation that shows itself in this realm is that of an incomprehensible dimension to existence which shows the characteristic of continuing-in-the-pneuminous-absence. It shows this characteristic by its continued reliability in our everyday lives. But the manifestation of the things in their incoherently coherent being only shows itself within the pneuma. Does the pneuma act upon the incomprehensible being-of-pneuminous-absence? Necessarily it does, insofar as where there was one thing (the incomprehensible noumena) there is now another also (the appropriating pneuma). The pneuma though does not just accrete in immediate presence it accretes at a distance in the φantastical world.
Though as the monad forms the accretions through its self-accretion there is also a manifestation of locality given to us by the manifestation of spatiality. The pneuma is not outside of the totality it is a force within it. Panpsychism is another φantasy we must note here. In this instance we might say that it is the monad that is local and that the pneuma is everything. Thus only in the local presence of the monad does the pneuma accrete into the forms of things. Yet here we have the perplexing issue (though we have it elsewhere too) of how the monad self accretes in order that it may accrete more pneuma into other things.