>>81660720
I hate mowing. Good luck lol.
>>81660701
>now quantum duality and qualia
What people chase is subjective/pointless to argue because a human cannot be fully aware of all it's parts, and there are many takes on what seperates conscious/unconscious/intentional/unintentional. Just invoking personhood is a generalization. The conversation then is about what is the most functional generalization/neurological model. So what, you're assigning intentionality to quantum phenomenon in the brain? That doesn't contradict the idea that, whatever contradictions are the result of a more nuanced understanding a human, are not functional. You don't disagree with me, that any moral system that doesn't sort out those contradictions, is not functional. Do you have a model that legitimately excuses contradictive behavior as good or not.
Your examples only seem like confirmation to me.