I would not call my position mystical monism because such reduction simply does not cut it. For starters, there's nothing mystical about it and the moniker of monism is rather misleading, too, as most strains of monism posit the unity as some kind of substance (even if immaterial or nonphysical), which is demonstrably (and even logically) false.

With that being said, yours is not an alternative viewpoint. It's a subset. Exactly as e.g. Newtonian description of physics is a subset of Einsteinian relativistic description. You simply cannot put them side by side as two alternative options. The former can be fully derived from the latter – Einstein simply encapsulates (and expands upon) Newton.

Using that analogy, I have no problem talking about, and dealing with, dualities when the situation warrants it. Exactly as Newtonian physics is still used in space flights (except for GPS satellites where time dilatation must be taken into account), and as you also observed, intuitive dualism is indispensable in day to day life. After all, what is called “enlightenment” does not eradicate dualism, it only puts it in its proper place.

However, considering the overall picture, there's simply no way to discard non-duality (which is not the same as monism) as merely another, equally viable, option among many. That would be a rather huge error even as far as logic and reasoning is concerned, which also the plethora of seemingly unsolvable paradoxes and “hard problems” that plague dualistic thought attest. That's also the reason why you see absurdity where there is none.

As I said, your general thrust is correct, but your viewpoint is still just a fragment of the whole picture and it has nothing to do with convictions. Quite to the contrary, while you have a worldview, you simply cannot see the truth.