The 'I' that is capable of seeing its self/selves in different ways, is now conscious of itself. The 'I' that's the whole of humanity, and in extension, the universe, is seeing itself.

I'm talking beyond reason and thought. Describing the 'thing in itself'.

Isn't this conclusion flawed especially because it is being made by an "I" that sees itself in totality? How much of "universal marriage" have you encountered to arrive here?

ps...am just trying to understand and yes, i (non universal) disagree with your conclusion

Mhhh...I am known to have the least humor in my bones but I will let you be. I was thinking of universal diversity. So, go ahead and make yourself clear otherwise you are free to ignore my question

If reports that two people are dead because of this leak, then we can begin to suspect that our ethics are wanting. Humans should have mercy in plenty and real space for perfection.

http://www.theguardian.c...ides-ashley-madison-hack

In the case of different behavior for different individuals or when one individual behaves differently along a timeline we have a philosophy of mind enabled with the task of finding, testing and using objective values. For example in the philosophy of mind I'm using I can enumerate the following objective values ( allow me to qualify 'objective' to entail the acquisition of information that's uninfluenced by personal opinion to the extent of non arbitrary rejection of contrary evidence as availed by behavior);

1. The presence of a mind(s)

2. Mind contents like objects, relations, qualia, processes

3. Mind structures and models including energy and information dynamics

4. Behavior and behavior patterns and communication dynamics

Any conclusion I make is per force, an assertion of my experience and evaluation of a conclusion is done by it's results and the structure of these results with respect to my experience. Like in the case of affairs I'd evaluate my conclusions by checking for:

1. Efficacy and effectiveness- is my propensity for affairs lower? Have I reduced my affairs?

2. Efficiency- how much time is required to adapt? How much intelligence is required? What's the ease of acquiring intelligence.

3. Morality and ethics- how much does it conform to the reality of other minds?

Because this is a highly dynamic process and rationality is bounded, I dare not speak of 'flawlessness'. Intelligence is worked on at every moment. For example, the number of objects and possible relations is infinite, add the characteristic of 'information hiding' in a mind system and flaws appear all over. I look at flaws as indicative of uncertainty and chaos- space for infinite possibility.