But either way you will be harming one and saving another.
You do not see the connection of that example because you fail to realise the subjectivity in Good and Bad.

How do you decide if an Art is Good or Bad? Why do some like one but not the other.
Why do some people say Durian is the best thing ever, but some abhor it?

Subjective point of view. You just don't see it, and probably never will.

Judges judge based on evidence. But are evidences always concrete? Is an eyewitness's account always reliable? Does the knife with blood prove conclusively one or the other? If right and wrong is as simple as you think it is, there is no need for court. Do it at the mamak store. Takes 30secs, why spent year and millions is legal fees?
The basis of those decisions should be reasoning, not social conventions.

Your idea of Good and Bad is based entirely on the latter, and none of the former.
My dog demonstrates guilt, remorse, sympathy, happiness, sadness and many more all the time.
Animals do have conscience and do make conscious decisions. You should read more. Darwin's books are a good start.
If we factor ignorance into intelligence, you might not be far ahead of some animals in that department.
"affect", not "effect".

What someone wants, does not equal to what is better.

"Only when it is not a detriment to others?"
So why is robbing Bill Gates off $1000 wrong? No harm done to him. Probably wouldn't know it's gone.
And how, exactly, does one measure spiritual growth? And by awareness, do you mean that you, who don't know the name of your neighbour who lives down the street, is more backward than the South American tribes who live in the jungle but know everyone in their community by name?

What if the cannibalism is towards an already dead human, which you did not kill?

Now comes the hypocrisy. If you take $1000 from Bill Gates and help an entire village get through the famine, which saved 1000 lives in your village, you are NOBLE, but you are still bad?
So we shouldn't do that? We should just sit and watch 1000 people die? Bill Gates really won't feel the pinch, you know?
Maybe your conscience is more civilised, but mine would not let me sit and watch that 1000 people die and not steal $1000 from Bill Gates. Robin Hood is a hero. So is Omar Little.

You contradict yourself. Superior judgment? It seems to me that you are merely following social conventions and not thinking for yourself. If you do, you would not have stated blanket statements such as "harm others= bad." You would have judged each situation individually. Since the Age of Enlightenment, judgments have been made based on reasoning. You agreed that intentions are important. Let me remind you intentions are derived from reasoning. Seeing as how you reject to reasoning, how do you determine one's intentions?

And tell me, do you object to the Death Penalty or to Prison Sentences?
Ah, so that was what 42 meant when the question to Life, the Universe and Everything was asked.