Some thoughts:

It's necessary to distinguish between behavioural goodness, experiential goodness, and structural goodness.

Behavioural goodness and experiential goodness cannot prove the realisation of goodness, because the pleasure derived from behaviour and experience may manifest as a form of appeasement and manipulation, which is absolutely not a sufficient condition for proving goodness. Any concrete behaviour can potentially be falsified as non-goodness within a broader relational structure.

Thus, the judgement of goodness in words and actions possesses unidirectionality: we can identify signals and structures deviating from goodness through words, actions, and experiences, yet we cannot prove the realisation of goodness from words, actions, and experiences.

Therefore, the necessary condition for goodness is not the goodness of emotions or behaviour, but rather the non-harm and non-dominance of structure. Whether it is emotional sadness or behavioural separation, as long as a relationship does not tend towards domination, manipulation, or harm, but instead promotes the freedom and growth of life, we have reason to define this relationship as having realised goodness.