Good how, exactly? In relation to design, 'good' has many factors, aesthetics being the most obvious, but I would argue, hardly the most essential. It is practically impossible to gauge the worth of art or design, being so naturally subjective. However, design has physical, emotional, and cultural impact to the world around us. It has consequence. So, I would suggest that each individual designer has a responsibility to apply not only an aesthetic value, but their own moral values or system of morality to the work they make. This diagram represents my evolving philosophy of design.
In this, my moral 'compass,' the closer to the center of the diagram that the nature of a project falls, the more I believe I have accomplished truly 'good,' or balanced design work. To explain, I'll unpack each of the extremes.
The northwest corner represents 'invisible design,' that is, all design that merely supports what already exists, and therefore is hardly noteworthy in its own existence. Although design can be invisible while also contributing something (ease of use for example--since we are much more likely to notice something that doesn't work than something that does), design that repeats what came before, supports the status quo, and fails to recognize the uniqueness of its situation and instead applies blanket logic to its context remains hollow and ineffectual.
At the opposite extreme to this in the southeast corner, sits 'visible' design. This is work that screams out in subversive or critical tones, without offering much in way of a solution. While visibility of issues is an important function of design, in that it helps spur change and raise awareness of neglected populations and situations, this only works if there's an offered action or potential solution offered alongside the hyper-visible work. That is, there needs to be a strong message along with the spectacle. Otherwise, all 'visible' design adds to culture is more noise.
The southwest corner houses the 'real.' In design terms, this would be any work that's purely data. Information without structure, hierarchy, or focus. While data on its own is still valuable, it is difficult to derive meaning from it without some structure. Design is an art of communication, and I believe it is a imperative duty of a designer to organize, structure, and visualize information in a way that makes it accessible. Falling into too literal of a representation can often withhold meaning that could be exposed with the right layout, illustration, or metaphor.
In the northeast corner, lines between art and design merge as 'speculations.' This isn't the world as it is, but the world as we imagine it. In design work, the issue arises when we stray so far into speculation that it has no reference, and therefore no function, to reality anymore. Innovation still needs a way forward, and the path is made clear with tools and ideas of the past, used in an original way. If the tools don't yet exist, it's necessary to pull back from the daydream and consider what is, and how it might help catapult the work into what could be.