From what I take to be the Taoist perspective, or at least my own take of it, the good is found in harmony between yin and yang which then serves as a return to Wuji—Wuji being in the Taoist cosmology the nameless Tao which produces the One, from which is produced the Two, from which is produced the Three, from which all things are produced. Bad, and by extension evil, for me is then a discord, or disharmony, between yin and yang. — javra

I agree. It's clear Taoism and my own model are close. I do not know Taoism. But the sort brief you give on it makes this somewhat clear. Thank you.

To say that good is a harmony between yang-as-good and yin-as-bad, or similar takes, to me so far makes no sense. As though too much good is then bad? But good is a balance between them? — javra

Agreed. That makes no sense. ;)

And I so far interpret these latter type of interpretations to be heavily influenced by western or else westernized thought: wherein light (hence yang) symbolizes good and shadow/darkness (hence yin) symbolizes bad. — javra

Sadly, yes, although as anyone with a pulse can notice, things, they are a changing! The move from yang to yin in the West is epic and actually now overbalanced. Chaos/desire is on the rise, and the chaos proponents have no idea where balance is, so they are #ourturn burning the house down also, just with yin instead of yang. Not good! No, not good at all!

But consider snow blindness—or, more technically, any condition where one would witness only whiteness/light in the complete absence of darkness/shadows. This creates an inability to see just as much as complete darkness does. So understood, neither light/yang nor darkness/yin would of itself be bad when balanced with the other: in balance, they are good together. This while both become bad (and by extension maybe evil … such as in causing temporary blindness) when out of balance with its dyad. — javra

Amen my Daoshi brother or sister or they, choose your delusion.

Sorta gets back to the notion of the metaphors one lives by. — javra

And the collective 'we' need to erase these delusions. I do not think they help. True balance is obtained only amid the polarity that leads to the trinary nature of reality. Nature did not specify and qualify diversity in this way by accident. We might do better, but I kind of doubt it. Still, any arrangement of the entities is fine so long as real wisdom is the goal.

I see this is in rough agreement to ↪Chet Hawkins's comments. — javra

Thank you, yes. There is accord.

ps. made a number of typos in haste. Corrected what I've found. — javra

Maybe so, but your meaning is solid and not mistaken.