The expression is “the enemy of good” not “the enemy if something” so in the end it’s about defining “good”. It varies with context. What’s good, move fast and break things or go slow and considerate? Is risking bugs worth it to launch a feature? How important is that feature? How important is it to have it now vs. later? And how do you reconcile it when what’s good for you is bad for me?

It's just the same about the definition of "perfect".

Fixing critical bugs is not perfectionism. Fixing low-impact bugs by making high-risk, well-intentioned changes might be.