Veganism

[Disagreeable]

It is a false analogy. In your archery analogy, the target exists in physical space. Both the archer and the spectators can see it, touch it, and agree on where the bullseye is located. In morality, there is no "visible" target.

This just begs the question.

Unlike a physical object, we cannot point to a "Moral Fact" in the natural world.

I can point to someone being tortured.

When an archer misses, they know they missed because the arrow is in the dirt. When societies disagree on morality (e.g., the ethics of euthanasia or wealth distribution), there is often no consensus on who "missed" and who "hit."

The fact that people disagree doesn't mean that people can't get it right sometimes.

If morality were as objective as target practice, we would expect to see a convergence of belief over time as "skill" increases.

It can be argued that we do see that. Women's rights, gay rights, the abolition of slavery.

So, moral "progress" is actually just moral change—a shift in cultural sensibilities rather than a closer approximation of a pre-existing truth.

That's your assumption.