Do you think there is such a thing as objective morality? Not just human ethics, or social norms or whatever, but that some things that occur are "better" than other things in some important sense. Or maybe, that certain actions are "good" and others are "bad"?

Like for instance, the experience a human would have when relaxing in a hot tub with their friends, is "better" in some important, real sense compared to the experience of dying in a trench in WWI?

If not, I probably can't convince you that there is a hard problem having to do with consciousness where we'd benefit from knowing all the answers. But if so, I could give it a try.

There are certainly things I like better than other things. There is probably a fair bit of overlap with what you like, but also certain to be differences. Where they differ, am I right, or you? If one of us is not wrong, then one is not objectively better.

A system for understanding consciousness that depends on objective merit will face very stiff competition from those that don't.

Wouldn’t you say the experience of “being you” or “being me” would be part of the system of how consciousness works? And therefore, whether you like something or I like something, it’s part of the happening of consciousness.

Maybe “you like the experience of drinking tea” is a totally compatible statement with “I don’t like the experience of drinking tea” in an objective sense.

I would say it’s not that consciousness depends on objective merit, but that it could be the other way around.