The conceptual fallacy actually goes to the core of the western paradigm of monist idealism.

Consider that, logically, a spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience, from which life rises, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which it fell.

The ideal is aspirational, while the absolute is elemental. Consequently all the ideologies arising in the long shadow of God also assume their ideals to be absolute. From the Terrors of the French Revolution, to the Stalinist purges, to the various communities of fundamentalist monotheism, to even late stage capitalism, as the bottom line takes precedence over any other factor in society.

Reality is more the yin and yang of polarities, from positive and negative charge as the basis of our material reality, to liberalism and conservative, as the cycles of social expansion and cultural consolidation. The energy driving us on, versus the forms we evolve. The anarchy of desire versus the tyranny of judgement. The heart and the head.

Good and bad are not some cosmic duel between the forces of righteousness and evil, but the basic biological binary of beneficial and detrimental. The 1/0 of sentience. It is from this basic push and pull that all the higher order, more nuanced standards arise. Trust, honor, love, respect, responsibility, etc. When the good is treated as aspirational, rather than elemental, conflicts do become a race to the bottom, of us versus them, good versus bad. Rather than each side being able to assume the other will hold to the higher standards of civilized behavior and potentially use such situations to further evolve.

We develop these standards and rules to further guide our decision making, not replace it. Our ideals should be tools, not gods.