I see, counter point I've thought about before, if you don't understand yourself and how you operate and make your decisions, if there's no right or wrong there would be a spiral of chaos, to understand people and their behavior you first have to understand your own behavior. Once you understand your own self and behavior you will be better able to understand others, and even be able to acknowledge difference in how they reached a conclusion.

And just because an individual, does not believe in objective morality, or does not believe in right or wrong, and does not believe in good or bad. That doesn't negate the existence of objective morality, it's still very real and on a planet of 7+ billion humans, there's at least 4 Billion that believe in objective morality (How do we reach that number Christianity 2 billion + Islam's 2 billion = 4 Billion, and if they adhere to their faith properly then that means their morals comes from God as objective morality), if we leave room for the outliers that may not be practicing and only religous by culture, to play it on the safe side there's at least 2 Billion people that believe in objective morality, this isn't even counting people outside of these faiths. But for the sake of conversation a majority of the world does acknowledge an objective morality.

So regardless of personal belief, it doesn't negate the fact that right and wrong are things that exist, even if you don't agree or don't use it in your own way of thinking based on your cumulative life experience.

But from my objective morality point of view, you can't determine what's true and logical and practical without looking at the facts of whats right or wrong because it's not that objective morality doesn't exist, it's just that you don't use that to determine reality. It definitely sounds like Ti.

From the pov of objective morality, not caring about justifying something or not, well there goes the legal system all over the world out the window. But that would mean that wars, rape, theft, murder, holocausts, animal cruelty, trafficking, all these types of things under a subjective morality or beneficial pov would mean that oh they just happen so it's justified by default, thats a major problem. So from an objective morality pov how something is justified is important, otherwise we can't determine justice from injustice which does exist even if one doesn't use it in their own thinking method. Arguably the explanation is the justification for whoever did the crime. There's no other solution but to hold them accountable, that's why there's so much debate on prison reform and how prison should still exist but just be reformed to help the humans be valuable to society depending on the severity of the crime.

As for Free Will (for me this leads into a theological discussion, so I don't want to initiate that if it's not welcomed, that would be unfair and might make you uncomfortable if it's not your interest, but I'm open to it if you want), but from my pov we have a limited free will.

So if a mother is single and commits suicide leaving her baby in an empty home eventually orphan basically, is that good or bad that the mother abandoned her kids in a dangerous world? Rather a better question for your pov is that beneficial or not? There's never been a time or scenario where suicide is a proper option. (This is the problem with subjective morality or utility or beneficial thinking, it leads to this idea that things like suicide are something that's acceptable), where as objective morality acknowledges humans have these innate beliefs that preserving life is important and suicide = problem. If you say it doesn't matter then it requires an explanation of why suicide is okay, there's no feasible reason for it, it's more so an emotional based decision people make, but those types of people have already lost sight of reality due to their life's hardships which they don't know how to navigate therefore can't navigate, but it doesn't make it a good thing or beneficial thing either, it just makes it a tragedy if not for others than to themselves. It won't benefit them either it's just running away, how can they conclude there's no after life where there would be no accountability, they can not ever prove the lack of a God, on the contrary its very easy to prove the existence of God. (Theological discussion, rather not dive further into it without your consent)

(Second part about free will and your purpose, also theological and religious related, I could answer, but rather not unless your okay with discussing it, I only put give this disclaimer because some people are sensitive and avoid theological discussions about religion and proofs, but I'm more than open to it if you want).

Oops sorry for misusing the words from your pov on good and bad.