1 In (Georgiev, 2008), Georgiev claims to have spotted a critical mathematical error in the paper (Song, 2008) showing the incompatibility between quantum theory and consciousness. This note's goal is to show that Georgiev's claim comes from a simple misunderstanding of the paper. The whole point of (Song, 2008) was to show that quantum theory's existing standard axioms cannot consistently describe the phenomenon presented as (N2), which describes a case where an observer in the mental reference frame e is observing his own reference frame's unitary evolution. This phenomenon can be pictured as follows: consider a closed system with an observer and a qubit. The observer can choose or change the measurement basis for the given qubit. Moreover, the observer can still have or change this basis choice e even when the closed system contains no qubit. Philosophy literature widely discusses self-observation, i.e., the observer observing his own mental state, which is also known as reflexive selfconsciousness or simply reflexive consciousness (for example, see (Halliday, 1989; Velmans, 2008)). (N2) considers a case when subject and the object being observed are identical, i.e., both correspond to a single vector, e , rather than two vectors pointing in the same direction. Let us now discuss the fallacy in Georgiev's argument (Georgiev, 2008).