It is obviously a moral goal. A well-ordered society brings about good and happiness—that is exactly the goal of morality. If you are asking what the goal of morality is, and you mean that it must necessarily have some external purpose beyond itself, then I claim that morality is a value in and of itself. Just as I could ask about your claim that the purpose of the commandments is "religious values"—what is the purpose of those values?—and your answer would be that these are value-goals that stand on their own, with no prior purpose.

I think you need to reread what I wrote. Morality is a means to create a well-ordered society, and therefore it cannot be the purpose of creating society itself. What you are suggesting is that the Holy One, blessed be He, wants there to be a society here for some reason, and that it should be well-ordered. That is not a moral purpose. If there were no society at all, that would not be a moral defect.

I do not understand. My claim is as follows:

The purpose of the Holy One, blessed be He, is to do as much good as possible (in the words of Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto: "The ultimate nature of the good is to bestow good"). Now two possibilities stood before Him: one—to create a world with beings that could attain happiness and goodness, and the other—not to create a world. Since, as stated, the will of the Holy One, blessed be He, is to do good, He obviously preferred to create the world, while commanding the creatures with commandments that would lead to a well-ordered society that would provide as much good and happiness as possible, and thus the Creator's purpose—to bestow good—would be fulfilled in the best possible way.

If the Holy One, blessed be He, had chosen not to create a world, then although there would be no moral defect in the sense of actively causing suffering and evil, it would certainly be a less moral state than the alternative of creating the world, because thereby the good and happiness that would have been achieved through the creation of the world would have been withheld. In other words, even if in the absence of a world no evil is caused, good that could have existed is still prevented. Therefore it is clear that He chose to create the world, and He wants and expects it to be conducted morally. I do not see where the flaw is in this explanation.

I've given up.

Too bad. I have to say that I truly do not understand your position. What is the problem with saying that the goal is morality, and that this means the goal is that there be a well-ordered and happy society, rather than there being no society at all, in which case it is not a perfectly moral reality?

In any case, thank you. I appreciate the effort you put into answering questions on a daily basis.