FUSsa-talk Mailing List: Fwd: Comparing countries

[Robert Tapp (tappx001]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Robert Tapp <tappx001 [at] umn.edu>
> Date: August 20, 2010 1:45:58 PM CDT
> To: Humanist Institute Discussion Group Discussion Group <hidisc [at] 
> humanistinstitute.org>
> 
> 
> The current Newsweek online mailing leads me to renew a rant. There are 3 
> articles on ranking countries by a number of different criteria that are 
> INVALUABLE for humanist goals and values. To often when we speak of the 
> importance of <science> we refer only to the physical and biological 
> sciences. (And some of us, alas, doubt that <social> sciences need to be 
> included). The fact remains that when we begin to describe more fully the 
> most complex form of life yet to evolve (us humans), we simply must add data 
> from those social sciences.
> 
> Unless we compare groups/cultures/countries with such empirical measures as 
> gender differences in literacy, infant mortality, wealth distribution, trust 
> and happiness levels -- we are simply being anecdotal.
> 
> Newsweek provides an <interactive infographic> that lets you compare 
> countries on a number of criteria. Spend some time with it.
> 
>       
> http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/15/interactive-infographic-of-the-worlds-best-countries.html
> 
> Andrei Codrescu adds a somewhat sardonic take on the fact that again and 
> again Scandinavian countries dominate the top ranks.
> 
>       
> http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/16/why-cold-depressive-countries-end-up-the-best.html
> 
> And Mona Mourshed and Fenton Whelan explore ways that early education, around 
> the world, closes some of the social gaps.
> 
>       
> http://www.newsweek.com/2010/08/16/secrets-of-the-world-s-best-school-systems.html
> 
> Sadly, Newsweek now has a new owner and many ex-staff writers, and things 
> like this may not be regular future fare. BUT there is something missing 
> already -- namely some serious analyses of the why's of these 
> differentiations. My often-cited author Lawrence Harrison admits that it was 
> only late in his career that he began to sense that religious differences 
> might be behind much of these differences. Early in the project (Huntington, 
> Samuel P., and Lawrence E. Harrison. 2000. Culture matters : How values shape 
> human progress. 1st ed. New York: Basic Books.) religion barely gets noted. 
> But in the major followup book (Harrison, Lawrence E. 2006. The central 
> liberal truth : How politics can change a culture and save it from itself. 
> Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press.) religious traditions become a 
> major explanatory factor. 
> 
> Humanists need to know this data, and to remind these researchers that the 
> high marks given to Scandinavian countries are not simply because those are 
> <Protestant> cultures (as opposed to less successful Roman, Orthodox, Muslim, 
> and Hindu cultures). After all, the US is a <Protestant > culture in many 
> ways. The Scandinavian cultures would be better labeled <Post-Protestant>. 
> For further collaboration, see Zuckerman, Phil. 2008. Society without god : 
> What the least religious nations can tell us about contentment. New York: New 
> York University Press.
> 
> The real point of my rant? It is data such as this that has already unleashed 
> the mixture of envy and admiration that produces social change. Not just 
> philosophical arguments about god-talk. Moving beyond the traditional gods 
> and their alleged decrees is necessary, but it is simply a beginning. To 
> modify a medieval Christian/Muslim metaphor:  A bridge,  Cross over -- but 
> don't build your house thereon!
> 
> Bob