Good and bad
First there is the moral side. Some folks believe that what makes actions good or bad has been decided for humanity by God. Some folks believe that it is the group (our culture) that decides what actions are good or bad. Either way, our lawmakers don’t seem to concern themselves much with where it flows from, they keep on trying to legislate morality as best they can.
Then there is the taste side. Some things are universally shunned as food. Other things are universally appreciated for their deliciousness. Many things fall into the category of being meat to one, poison to another. There is, after all, no accounting for taste.
Then there is the question of function. Things work or they don’t.
What about words? No morality in the words themselves because they don’t have the ability to act and morality is an active thing. They can be used immorally, just as any object can, but the goodness or badness doesn’t reside in the tool, but in its user.
Taste, for sure! I like the way some words sound, and avoid using some others.
How about function? Gee, I can’t think of any broken words, can you? They all work in the sense that they convey meaning, even if they are nonsense and the message they convey is that their user has lost it.
For me, definitions are, to words, as mechanics are to airplanes. I want the very best for the ones I use.
How about, for conservative, something on the order of, “One who seeks to preserve those things which are best.”?
How about, for liberal, something on the order of, “One who believes that by working together we can makes things better.”?
How about for good politician, (good in the moral sense, by the way) “One who acts on his or her belief that if there is nothing good that can be said about another, one should remain silent.”