In my experience, qualitative measures are that of opinion, while quantitative measures are that of fact.
For instance, "Jung sexually abused his patients" is a statement that can be objectively verified, thus it is considered to be "fact". This is why it would be wise to present evidence for such a statement.
On the other hand, "Jung was intelligent" is a statement that is both qualitative and subject to interpretation - so it is considered an opinion. From a layman, Jung would probably seem exceedingly intelligent. However, compared to Einstein, he may not have been intelligent. In a biological context, every poster on this forum is intelligent because we are all sentient.
So this is why it is exceedingly difficult to measure quality.
Also - concerning the physicality of the universe - I recognize that there tends to be a symptom of nihilism that drifts along the back of such a worldview, like a parasitic remora tagging along with a whale. This is brought to light especially in regard to free will; for when we adhere to a purely physical state of existence, we deny any breed of metaphysical free will, and our choices are suddenly solely contingent upon neurons in our brains and external stimuli. The seat of consciousness becomes purely physical.
Not only that, but we deny any metaphysical quality of humanity. However, I think that society runs much more smoothly when we add some level of subjective free will. When we dispense some sort of divine nature to ourselves and each other, we give more of a reason to be compassionate, and less of a reason to measure the quantitative worth of a human.
We do not always make our decisions with objective reality in mind... and with good reason.