"I see morality as having to do with the burden of freewill which allows us to be good or bad.'

That's the maguffin. It's how the priests "explain" game theory to the masses. In one of your other articles, you wrote about political elites believing that they must fool the masses because the masses aren't very bright. But morality is just another domain in which different elites play the same, er, game.

I don't think homo sapiens is as special as you do. We've got brains that make instinct less important, but I believe that good and bad are metaphors. We may "do the right thing" because it's right, but it IS the right thing if and only if it pays off in evolutionary (not necessarily personal) terms. If it didn't, it wouldn't be "the right thing," or the population would perish, as some have done when their "right thing" turned out to be the wrong thing.

You write a lot about what style of analysis you prefer, as if God cares. It reminds me of what I call the "wantological" proof that God exists, viz., if He doesn't, life would suck. Presumptuousness is a character trait, not a truth value. Seems to me you are arguing ad hominem.