Higher order perspectives are still relative good? Can you escape Absolute Relativism

[Arthogaan]

@Leo Gura suggests that even if postmodernism is largely true, there can still be a hierarchy of perspectives: some perspectives are more inclusive, more coherent, more robust, and better at understanding others. From this view, certain perspectives are “better” because they help humanity flourish or function more effectively.

My question is: if we accept that all value judgments are ultimately relative, doesn’t claiming that some perspectives are “better” already assume hidden values—like wanting humanity/human consciousness to survive or flourish? If we strip away those assumptions, isn’t the notion of a hierarchy of perspectives ultimately just a game of aesthetics or preference? How can we justify saying one perspective is truly better, rather than just different?

In Absolute Truth it does not matter and @Leo Gura is just playing a game inside his Absolute Dream of helping humanity align to higher order perspective - but there is ultimately nothing Good about it. It is not more perfect than Trump spreading his egotistical patterns. Even though we can agree Leo's perspective is of better quality, understanding, scope, consciousness etc. - still - we cannot say it is Better. Because it is Love/Dream/Nothingness/Void anyway. Or maybe Leo will lead humanity to flourish but because of that humanity will in the future kill some alien species that is actually more inteligent/loving than humanity - so wouldn't that make /Teaching Humanity higher order perspectives/ actually a bad thing to happen in the relative dream looking retrospectively? Can we really escape the Absolute Relativism or in the end it is true but we can just choose more beautiful aesthetics?