I will now present something that supports my whole worldview which supports and objective (intrinsic) good and bad. Positive thoughts have to line up with positive emotions and negative thoughts have to line up with negative emotions since positive thoughts make us feel positive emotions and negative thoughts make us feel negative emotions. From there, value judgments of good value make us feel positive emotions such as thinking it is a good day today while value judgments of bad value make us feel negative emotions such as thinking something is horrible. So, you have a positive thought which is just a positive thought and then you have a positive emotion which is intrinsically positive like a positive charge.

You then have a negative thought which is just a negative thought and then you have a negative emotion which is intrinsically negative like a negative charge. To take it one step further, you have a positive (good) value judgment and then you have a positive (good) emotion which is intrinsically good. From there, you have a negative (bad) value judgment and then you have a negative (bad) emotion which is intrinsically bad. If a good or bad value judgment did not make you feel a positive or negative emotion, then there could be a number of factors as to why. Other than that, they do make you feel positive and negative emotions. Even if these positive and negative emotions were induced by other means such as drugs rather than thoughts, then they would still be intrinsically good and bad emotions.

Indeed there might be one ethical position that is best. However, whether TR is trying to be too pure or not... well, some of this is an effect of age. Younger people, swept up in enthusiasm for the topic, (or crotchety old cranks swept up in enthusiasm) tend to take up "pure" positions rather than more equivocal positions. We think more clearly when we are not possessed by a god. enthusiasm, (early 17th cent.: from Greek enthousiastikos, from enthous ‘possessed by a god')

Then there are people who are possessed by the devil, which is a lot like god-possessed enthusiasm, too. They just aren't as nice about it. (I'm not referring to you, btw.)

We think more clearly when we are not possessed by a god. enthusiasm, (early 17th cent.: from Greek enthousiastikos, from enthous ‘possessed by a god') — Bitter Crank

I'm not so sure. Enthusiam is a productive driver of thought. I feel that it is the quest for elegance that adversely affects thinking sometimes.

Have you considered and rejected Epicureanism?