Schrödinger’s cat

peace,
 
In lectures on statistical uncertainty, you mentioned Schrödinger’s cat as an example of an ontitudinal uncertainty.
It is clear why quantum superposition as a rule expresses ontic doubt;
I wonder why but the thought experiment about the cat is defined as a paradox and I was puzzled by the presentation of the cat as if it were in a superposition at a given time.
This may cast a paradoxical light on the Copenhagen interpretation, but it is not the least of the problems, the problem is in the interpretation. I have now seen that there is also a
Specifically
1. It is clear why the observer outside the box does not know the cat’s condition;
2. It is clear why the unstable atom is in a superposition of an intact state and a decomposed state and accordingly, so is the beta particle that the detector will measure.
3. The collapse of the wave function for the decay of the atom – once the detector measures the particle, it inevitably occurs while the cat is still alive.
4. Measuring the particle (stage in which the cat is alive) – is beyond the macroscopic scale (it is not needed because the particle has already collapsed upon release, but this is the stage where it is also visible at the macroscopic level).
5. We have proven the existence of a point in time at which the wave function collapsed, the cat is alive (i.e., not in any superposition). Closing our eyes for another time until the deterministic process that occurs from there until the cat’s death is completed is our choice. That is, the doubt from that moment on is already epistemic and not ontic.
What absurdity for the Schrödinger and Einstein method is there here? (Even according to Bohr’s Copenhagen interpretation, which they present as absurd)
First I thought about the precision with which we define a description of the wave function of the cat’s state at a specific time *in the future* when I open the box – and right now it is indeed a superposition; yet in this alone I see no absurdity: the cat is not alive and dead at the same time. It only has some finite current chances of living or dying in the future. There is an ontic doubt *right now* whether *in the future* the cat will be alive or dead.
There is also a relative interpretation given on Wikipedia, where they actually distinguish between the first large-scale measurement (the cat’s knowledge of its condition) and the opening of the box.