Let's look at the most simple scenario possible: John stole your stuff. Had you lived in 10,000 BC you probably would've set out to strike him back; so civilization, which emerged later, had decided that stealing causes destructive behaviors and is therefore immoral. So since now that you live in 2019, if John stole your stuff you can have him arrested because everyone agrees that stealing is immoral.

But if we put the focus on John, however, we find that he probably wasn't doing this out of free choice, and that he were strongly molded by society. Say, he grew up in a nasty slum and always had to survive by stealing, so he, facing whatever situation, probably thought it was necessary for him to steal your stuff.

From your perspective, to be a thief is to be destructive and therefore immoral, even though society made him so in the first place. But from the John's perspective, it's society that has been destructive by having made who he is, and that his behavior is society taking its well-deserved toll, even though stealing is destructive.

So as we can see, whenever we call something moral or immoral, the underlying assumption is always ''This is (im)moral because blah blah blah, EVEN THOUGH blah blah blah''.

So to recap:

You: John shouldn't have had been a thief because it's destructive to society, even though that's exactly what society have molded him into.

John: I have no reason to NOT be a thief because that's what society molded me into, even though you lost your stuff as a result.

And it's even impossible to remove the ''even though'' because, duh, that'd make morality obsolete. But we can't deny the fact that you can't fundamentally substantiate these ''even-thoughs'' using any empirical falsifiable truth.

My solution to this conundrum is, please don't laugh, to ''not give a fuck''. That is, you don't give a fuck that John stole your stuff--in fact, you don't give fuck about ANYTHING that would be considered transgressions towards you.

Sure, this may sound ludicrous and counterintuitive, but think about this:

The less fucks you give about your property, the less John would want to STEAL your property.

Or similarly, in other situations:

The less fucks you give about your reputation, the less haters would find it valuable to tamper it.

The less fucks you give about your politically enthusiastic colleague Karen, the less she'd find it worthwhile to try to convert you to her political worldview.

The difficult part is that this solution can only work if EVERYONE in a given society sticks to it. But once everyone does, society as we know it would be so much better that the conventional concept of morality becomes obsolete.

If everyone stops giving a fuck about their property, there'd be no thieves--I mean, no nasty slums and street rats like John in the first place.

This may seem as if I'm just peddling communism, but no, hear me: this applies to ANY other situation as well, and solves the problems with maximal efficiency.

If everyone stops giving a fuck about their own reputations, then nobody would get haters since it's now futile to hate someone.

If everyone stops giving a fuck about converting people to their own religions, then their religions wouldn't get attacked and criticized in the first place.

If everyone stops giving a fuck about having enemies, then nobody would be anybody's enemy.

The list goes on and on. But one thing's for sure: the world will be a better place if we all don't give a fuck.