We never even got to answer this question.
Is there a proper use? Or did it do us no damn good? Progressivism is the ultimate example of the mis-applied use of deontological reasoning, that there are intrinsic moral goods evaluted only relative to the emotive content of the goals themselves, without regard to any consequences. The thought that some goods have asymptotically good values no matter what, without even considering that there should be a cost.
Who was the first to couch moral language in the idea of infinitely valued goods? Who started this? Was it really universalism? No reason to think we cannot do a proper genealogy; not everything needs to be liberalism and puritanism.
Sounds like it could be the latter, but there had to be a few specific advocates that advocated it above all else. Where does the blame lay for modern extensive moralism couched in deontological rhetoric? Stuart Mill? Rousseau? Who betrayed the city of god? Who lost the city of god? It wasn’t the pagans, that much is clear. It wasn’t the hells either though.
Let’s make a list, of who betrayed near everyone including the infinities themselves, by pretending that any positive moral goods were absolutes and making a mockery out of that there was an exchange rate for even morality. Especially considering the heterogeneous demand for positive moral goods. Its to my distaste to mention such details, because it was just wrong enough with the first part.