Statements as to which character is good or evil, along with statements as to why one does an evil or good run, all rely upon one's interpretation of the nature of good and evil, which depends, at least in part, upon ethical and metaethical philosophy. One must define good and evil before one can attribute the definition. Those definitions will be based upon arguments, which in turn shall depend upon ethical and metaethical philosophy.
I actually disagree that defining terms to that level is necessary for a useful discussion, but debating that is even further off topic than getting into what good and evil are. Which is a digression from talking about our impressions of the specific alignments of companions. Which is only tangentially related to the topic of which companions we each personally intend to use in our playthroughs.
(Which isn’t to say I don’t like a good pedantic debate - I wouldn’t have studied philosophy for seven years if I didn’t - but sometimes it’s not the time or place!)
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
