When discussing human affairs, while we cannot offer mathematical proof, we can observe patterns in how ethical norms develop and evolve. The notion that moral values can range indefinitely is incoherent, as it incorrectly assumes that morality is purely a cultural construct. Consider how people acquire culture: not through instantaneous transmission, but through observing a limited set of behaviors and actions and constructing in our minds the set of attitudes and beliefs that constitutes culture.
This process parallels how we learn language, develop visual systems, or construct scientific theories.
Our DNA provides fixed constraints that guide the development of these universal moral structures while allowing for certain degrees of variation. The assumption that moral values are purely cultural reflections oversimplifies a complex biological and social process.
What can be said about developing moral character is that it is critical to foster tolerance for variation while maintaining opposition to coercion and control.
> "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so"
And since we presumably *think*…that we are thinking things…there is the *good*, which means there’s already its correlative *bad*. This certainly is true as it concerns the aesthetics of good taste and good sense.
The universe as a whole likely doesn’t give a shit, but the part of it we occupy seems to care. Progress depends on it. It must.