Moving on, allow me to try a different example than smite or detect evil.

Behold the DnD definition of good:
Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
Now there is a spell called Sanctify the Wicked, from Book of Exalted Deeds. It is a spell that traps an evil person in a gem for a year and forcibly converts them to the casters alignment. Tell me, how does this exactly demonstrate "altruism, respect for life and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings"? The person is technically killed (no respect for life) by its previous body being turned to dust.

the definition of altruism is:
the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.
The person after having undergone this spell, sees the caster as enemy regardless of alignment and seeks to destroy them, implying a lot of mental pain was inflicted (no altruism) and it most certainly isn't respecting the dignity of the person involved. the only personal sacrifice this spell requires is a level from you, which given that it takes a year for this spell to take place over, isn't that hard to earn back.

Yet, its not only a GOOD necromancy spell, but a SANCTIFIED one, one that requires you to be utterly devoted to good! beyond even what a paladin is required to do!

So a pure good spell from an official DnD supplement all about being as good as you possibly can by its very structure, violates every single definition that Good uses in core, all to mindwash a sentient being into arbitrarily sharing a good persons alignment against their will. This is a ninth level spell! THIS is the pinnacle of goodness? Doesn't seem like it.

This spell contradicts the entire view that Alignment is functional, for its a Good spell that treats evil as gunk to be washed off and the persons mind forced into being the way you want them to be.

Death of the Author: the designers of DnD didn't realize how broken alignment was, due to inclusions of things like Sanctify the Wicked. They didn't think its inclusion through or they outright didn't know because different writers worked on it. Basically, it fails the universality test as a method of combatting evil, as there are lot of people I wouldn't want to use this on, and anyone dangerous enough would be someone I kill instead. And its a much better story and more organic to redeem someone through natural methods anyways.

When a spell doesn't match the definition of the magical moral force it supposedly requires to cast, I don't how it can be functional. I certainly wouldn't call any use of this spell good.