The concept of good and evil should ideally be abandoned in order to create a more just world

First off, I would like to admit my opening argument was flawed, I accept that now, so I am going to rebuttal now and use different arguments. My new argument/rebuttal is that goodness and justice are very similar and that abandoning the concept of good and evil for the sake of justice does not make sense. To summarize Pro's argument, the concept of good and evil cannot derive from religion, society, or individual formula because all those things contradict each other. Then he goes on to say the concept is used by governments to control people. All this is true, yet the same thing could be said about justice. Different societies, religions, et cetera differ on what is justice and what is not justice. And most of the time, when someone calls something good, he also would call that something just. For instance, the same people who would call abortion unjust would also call it evil. So in a sense, the concept of justice and good and evil go hand-in-hand. So it is illogical to get rid of one concept for the sake of the other. Furthermore, the concept of justice could be used by governments to control their people. For instance, a government could say killing a black man for spitting on the ground is just, same way the government could call the same action to the black man good. Based on this, the concept of justice is equally flawed as good and evil. And even though you want to throw out good and evil, you state 'Therefore, perhaps we should judge what is good and evil based on its actual benefit or detriment to society Things with a net benefit would be seen as good, whereas things with a net detriment would be seen as evil.' Things with a net benefit would be seen as good, whereas things with a net detriment would be seen as evil.' This statement illustrates that you don't want to give up good ad evil, but merely want to make the concept be based on a more objective scale. (Which I agree with, by the way.) The concept of good and evil didn't work so much in the past is not because the idea is flawed. The concept was not even made up to keep people from doing wrong, it is merely an observation of deeds people do. People did and are still doing so much wrong things because they do not care about right or wrong, good or evil. And besides, if we replace the old one idea of good and evil with the new concept based on justice, it will not change the fact that people do selfish things that are a detriment to society. Selfish people will not care if you call them evil or unjust. How would abandoning the idea of good and evil help make a more just world? I have previously argued that both are equally flawed and each could be used by governments to control their people. And with you murder scenarios, if you kill someone that is going to kill a lot of people, it is a good act based on you idea of goodness-'we should judge what is good and evil based on its actual benefit or detriment to society'. With the second scenario, the good and just thing to do is to sacrifice yourself for cannibalism. If you have to sacrifice someone, sacrifice yourself. In conclusion, abandoning the concept of good and evil for the new concept of justice, both of which have been around for the same amount of time, would not make any sense because it will not effect anything. It will not make a more just world. It might not make a more unjust world either, but that is not the topic of debate.