Human Freedom Index

The south of France's Languedoc-Roussillon:Facebook & Travel+Leisure

The link below presented on my Facebook blog page, see the Facebook logo for blog link, has earned the most 'people reached', whatever that means, by far of any of my Facebook blog posts.

My Facebook blog is used to primarily promote my Blogger blog sites which receive far more pageviews than the newer Facebook blog page, but I am posting some links on the Facebook blog from material I find on the web.

If you are interested in hearing me present very short lectures, I have been producing audio posts almost weekly recently on Satire And Theology. I am pleased to state that my public speaking is much improved from previous attempts, some on this blog, although I fully admit I am not going to be confused with a motivational speaker or radio disc jockey. The audio posts are academic lecture meets satire...

---

Cato.Org

Cited

(2015 my add)

'The Cato Institute is a public policy research organization — a think tank – dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peace. Its scholars and analysts conduct independent, nonpartisan research on a wide range of policy issues.'

Cited

(2015 my add)

The index published here presents a broad measure of human freedom, understood as the absence of coercive constraint.

It uses 76 distinct indicators of personal and economic freedom in the following areas:

Rule of Law
Security and Safety
Movement
Religion
Association,
Assembly, and Civil Society
Expression
Relationships
Size of Government
Legal System and Property Rights
Access to Sound Money Freedom to Trade Internationally
Regulation of Credit, Labor, and Business

The Human Freedom Index (HFI) is the most comprehensive freedom index so far created for a globally meaningful set of countries. The HFI covers 152 countries for 2012, the most recent year for which sufficient data is available. The index ranks countries beginning in 2008, the earliest year for which a robust enough index could be produced. This preliminary report will be updated (using data for 2013) and subsequently presented and updated on a yearly basis.

On a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 represents more freedom, the nonweighted average rating for 152 countries in 2012 was 6.96. The level of global freedom stayed about the same compared to 2008, but almost all countries experienced changes in their ratings, with about half of those increasing their ratings and half decreasing.

The top 10 jurisdictions in order were Hong Kong, Switzerland, Finland, Denmark, New Zealand, Canada, Australia, Ireland, the United Kingdom, and Sweden. The United States is ranked in 20th place. Other countries rank as follows: Germany (12), Chile (18), Japan (28), France (33), Singapore (43), South Africa (70), India (75), Brazil (82), Russia (111), China (132), Nigeria (139), Saudi Arabia (141), Venezuela (144), Zimbabwe (149), and Iran (152).

Out of 17 regions, the highest levels of freedom are in Northern Europe, North America (Canada and the United States), and Western Europe. The lowest levels are in the Middle East and North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asia. Women’s freedoms, as measured by five relevant indicators in the index, are most protected in Europe and North America and least protected in South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Middle East and North Africa.'

End Citations

I admit that another organization may use different criteria, numbers and have different rankings, but the United States of America ranked at number twenty, interests me.

One of the things my internship professor told me while at Columbia Bible College was that the United States has a strong mythology. Not to state that Canada does not, and every country has some type of mythology.

Part of what may be considered American mythology is the idea that it is and has always been since its beginnings, the freest nation on earth.

The nation with the most liberty.

I ponder on philosophically if the sheer size and power of the United States government and its military and maintaining intelligence does not at least, perhaps work against the freedoms of its citizens.

A very large government and the largest military in the world can motivate the State through the gathering of intelligence to preserve this power by limiting the freedom and liberty of its citizens.

When this report was mentioned on the CBC program The Exchange with Amanda Lang....paraphrased, the growing power of the United States government that could be used to curtail freedoms was mentioned as a reason for its ranking,

Does the United States of America use more 'coercive constraint' than some other Western countries because of the size of government, military and intelligence services?

RSF

The World press freedom index 2014 from Reporters Without Borders for 2014 has the United States ranked 46th in press freedom whereas Finland is 1st, Canada is 18th and the United Kingdom is 33rd.

Both of sets of statistics and indexes are not entirely objective as there is subjectivity present in criteria chosen and analysis, but I do ponder on why the United States of America is ranked lower than some other less powerful Western nations.

Ontology

As documented

A Facebook friend of mine working on her PhD, posted on my Facebook main page and mentioned, ontology.

I was indicated to perhaps be donnish, but when I simply skimmed the post on my mobile phone quickly at work, I originally read it as dorkish.

Another reason for re-reads...

Ontology is from the Greek word for being, and is a 17th century term for the branch of metaphysics that is concerned with what exists. Blackburn (1996: 269).

The ontological argument is an a priori (non-empirical knowledge or speculation, my add) has been used by those such as Anselm and is noted as purely a priori as an attempt to prove the existence of God. Blackburn (1996: 269). Blackburn writes that Aquinas did not accept the argument. Blackburn (1996: 269).

Blackburn mentions Plantinga as a modern philosopher that has stated a version of the ontological argument. Blackburn (1996: 269).

The view of Anselm is that God is something of which nothing greater can be conceived. Blackburn (1996: 269).

Plantinga uses the concept of possible worlds and that it is at least possible that a maximally great being exists in every possible world, if it exists in one possible world, it exists in all possible worlds. So, the maximally great being exists in every possible world. Blackburn (1996: 269). Plantinga (1977)(2002: 111-112).

It is an impossible proposition of the maximally great being in one possible world and every possible world, to not exist, therefore the being exists in the actual world. Plantinga (1977)(2002: 111-112).

Plantinga presents a version he reasons is valid and sound and he states that the argument does not prove the existence of God. His version, proves not the truth of theism, but that fact that the argument is rational; or its 'rational acceptability' as an argument.  Plantinga (1977)(2002: 112).

This does read as reasonable and sound and true.

I have never used an ontological argument and likely never will.

The critic can state that he/she, because much of the argument rests on what a human being can reason in conception, can conceive of a being as great as the maximally great being.

So, two maximally great beings. Perhaps one good and one evil? Dualism? I have come across that argument more than once.

Even when countered with the concept, that I use, that there cannot be two infinite (limitless) beings as they would be one infinite (limitless) being, many ontological arguments and counter arguments would focus too much on what the person and critic can subjectively 'reason' and 'conceive'. The reasoning and conception not necessarily being philosophically and theologically reasonable or for that matter sound and true.

Dualism being ruled out as contradictory as I reason the one infinite being that was both infinitely good and infinitely evil would be contradictory.

Or, good and evil are one in the same, i.e. there is no such thing as evil. One infinite being would be viewed as good.

Instead arguments for first cause, although still using human reasoning of course, rely less on human reasoning in the sense of what a person subjectively conceives.

It relies more so on objective reason.

A vicious regress occurs when a problem cannot solve itself, this not being the case with infinite numbers, with negative numbers, as infinite regress, as they are not real things but can count real things that do actually exist. An infinite regress is not always vicious.

A vicious regress occurs if time is eternal and infinite as in how would we arrive from the eternal, infinite past to the present? It would be impossible to traverse from the infinite past to the present.

Therefore, there exists an eternal, infinite first cause prior to time that created time.

This also could be stated in regard to matter and the universe which many scientists reason began with a big bang theory. Energy, time and space also have beginnings and are therefore finite.

What immaterial being existed prior to the big bang?

It is deduced as a non-material, eternal, infinite first cause.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1982) The Nature of Necessity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (2000) Warranted Christian Belief, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Cornelius Van Til (Brief PhD Edit)

Find the drone...

Cornelius Van Til (Brief PhD Edit)

Revelation

Cornelius Van Til explains that Reformed theology presupposes the God that reveals himself. Van Til (1969: 18).

Kant was opposed to speculative views of indefensible rationalism. Blackburn (1996: 206). Cornelius Van Til suggests Kant reasons God is not a law giver to humanity, God cannot reveal himself through nature or human constitution with the image of God. The intellect of human beings makes no positive assertions concerning God. Kant rejects notions of theoretical knowledge of God and, instead, appeals to practical reason and faith. Van Til (1977: 246-247). Plantinga writes that it is suggested by many commentators Kant demonstrated there are insurmountable problems with the idea that the traditional Christian God exists. Plantinga (2000: 7).

Van Til writes that the Reformers reasoned they were listening to Christ directly through the Scriptures as God revealed himself to humanity. Van Til (1977: 246).

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996)  Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy,  Oxford, Oxford University Press.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1929)(2006) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated by Norman Kemp Smith, London, Macmillan. http://www.hkbu.edu.hk/~ppp/cpr/toc.html.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1997) Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Mary Gregor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1898)(2006) The Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, London, Longmans, Green, and Co. http://philosophy.eserver.org/kant/critique-of-practical-reaso.txt

KANT, IMMANUEL (1791)(2001) ‘On The Miscarriage of All Philosophical Trials in Theodicy’, in Religion and Rational Theology, Translated by George di Giovanni and Allen Wood, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1982) The Nature of Necessity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (2000) Warranted Christian Belief, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

VAN TIL, CORNELIUS (1969) A Christian Theory of Knowledge, Nutley, New Jersey, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.

VAN TIL, CORNELIUS (1977) Christianity and Barthianism, Nutley, New Jersey, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.

Henotheism

Vancouver

A Sikh colleague and I at the corporate site were in dialogue on religion and he asked about the different divisions within the historical Christian Church.

The Christian Church whether Protestant, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and in most cases Non-Denominational is Biblical, trinitarian and monotheistic.

Distinctions exist within the triune God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) and yet God is Biblically and theologically considered of one nature and essence and one God.

Traditionally three persons, one nature, essence and God.

Admittedly, there are some, for example, modalist churches that from a secular perspective would be considered of the Christian tradition (such as in British academia), that would deny the trinity for modalism.

From British academia

Modalism emphasis the extreme limits of the trinity emphasizing unity at the expense of the plurality. Richardson (1996: 375). Three persons are assigned the modes or manifestations of the one divine being. Richardson (1996: 375).

I would state that modalism is not Biblical trinitarian theology, or a Biblical doctrine. To reference, Richardson, I reason modalism would only be trinitarian in broad, non-Biblical terms.

Biblical trinitarian theology denies the modes or manifestations, rather viewing the trinity as three distinctions or persons that are equally eternal God in nature and essence (Hebrews 1, Matthew 28, Acts 5).

In our discussion I mentioned henotheism.

Ronald Clements explains that henotheism is the exclusive worship of one god, while holding to a theological belief that other gods exist and may be worshipped by other peoples. Clements (1999:248.)

Cambridge and Alan E. Lewis states that henotheism is allegiance to one supreme deity while conceding the existence of others. This is also described as monolatry, incipient monotheism and practical theism. Lewis (1996: 321-322)

The far more well-known theological concept of polytheism is related as it is the belief in, and worship of many gods and Blackburn connects polytheism to Hinduism. Blackburn (1996: 292).

It is the belief in many gods and the implied opposite of monotheism. Shorter (1999: 454).

Therefore, theologically and philosophically, henotheism is under the umbrella of polytheism.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CLEMENTS ROGER (1999) ‘Henontheism’ in lan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, London, ACM Press.

LEWIS, ALAN E. (1996) 'Henotheism' in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

SHORTER, AYLWARD (1999) ‘Polytheism’ in lan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, London, ACM Press.

Vancouver

Vancouver