We both agree that everything can be explained without reference to the ego. I think it's important to be able to provide these explanations, but irrelevant; an intelligent speaker speaks not to a mass of chemicals but to a listener, from the perspective of her own ego. Thus sentences like: "How are you feeling today?" which is not a question about brain chemistry. So to shift the subject of the conversation from her own ego to the mass of chemicals is to avoid the rules of the language-game, if that makes sense.

As another rule of the language-game, so to speak, we expect people who exist in language to be able to provide explanations for their actions which treat themselves as egos. (We ask the child why she did something wrong, and she says, "I don't know." We don't ask the dog at all, at least not expecting a response. When we get this response from an adult, we either shake our heads in disgust at the attempt to deny responsibility or else find out whether she is mentally ill.)