I like to think that determining goodness is an innate skill. I also like to think that the desire to do good is universal. Unfortunately, humans just don't behave this way. To determine if something is good, requires evaluation of facts that are true. Getting trustworthy facts is becoming increasingly difficult in the New Norm. Given this, how do you determine what is good?
I can't answer this for you, but I can give my opinion. I assert that something is bad if you wouldn't do it in front of your Mother. If you need to hide your face or lie about it, it's not good. I'd like to say, just don't do it, but that's a little naive.
Another test of goodness is whether the effect of an action has a beneficial result. What's beneficial? Consider the kind act of feeding racoons. You'd think this is a good thing. Try it one evening with one racoon. The next day, the racoon will bring a friend. Feed them both. Pretty soon, 2 becomes 4, 4 becomes 8 and so on. Is this a good thing? It may have a short term beneficial effect for a single racoon, but long term, many racoons become dependent on the feeding. Same goes for controlling wolf population. Killing wolves protects helpless livestock, but results in severe damage to the ecosystem. Reintroduction of wolves into the west has resulted in healthier fauna and FLORA. Yes, plants grow better because wolves eat bones, resulting in calcium being put back into the soil.