The issue is rather muddled, but there are a few basic points which might help to clarifiy it.

For one thng, good and bad are not some cosmic conflict between righteousness and evil, but the basic biological binary of beneficial and detrimental. The 1/0 of sentience. Even bacteria get that.

Consequently when we assume good to be aspirational, rather than elemental, conflicts do tend to become a race to the bottom, as all the higher order social constructs, from love and trust, to respect and responsibility, are more complex than basic black and white.

Life is complicated.

Another, specifically Western fallacy, would be that a spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience, from which we rise, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which we fell. The fact we are aware.

While there are certainly many debates over the existance and or nature of God, there doesn't seem to have been much philosophic debate over treating an ideal as universal. One is aspirational, the other is elemental. When people live in a culture where ideals are assumed to be absolute, even when transferred to other aspirations, it doesn't facilitate much intercultural interaction.