upvote

points

by ashkankiani9 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby amelius8 hours ago|
next
[-]
Sorry but you're arguing against a reputable institution here.
reply
upvoteby ashkankiani8 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I'm not arguing against a reputable institution, I'm arguing against using that reputation + their final number alone without going through the process to verify the methodology myself, which you didn't link to. You only showed the conclusion, which to all of us, should mean very little until we look into how that number was arrived at.

And I don't care if they're reputable, I will look at the methodology and make my own conclusion either way. Appeals to authority are not a substitute for critical thinking.

reply
upvoteby amelius8 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
We're not talking about a few % difference here. If you want to look into it then fine, but you have to come up with some really good evidence if you think you can debunk anything here.
reply
upvoteby lejalv5 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
We're talking about the country that has tried multiple times to destroy their country, look up Mossadegh for the 1950s and check out the glorious bombing of a school for 2026.

No lessons to take from the US.

PS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_U...

I know the US thinks only its citizens are human, so "The United States has been involved in hundreds of interventions in foreign countries throughout its history, engaging in nearly 500 military interventions between 1776 and 2026, with half of these operations occurring since 1950 and over 25% occurring in the post-Cold War period” is not probably part of the reputable storytelling

reply
upvoteby pessimizer8 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
There's absolutely nothing in those numbers to argue against. They are simply providing fluffy quantitative declarations in order for people who don't even claim any particular knowledge or even understanding of the details of the metric (such as yourself) to argue from authority.

If they actually said something, it would be much less effective.

> We're not talking about a few % difference here.

How may freedom percent is it again? Do you lose 1% or 20% for failing to allow foreign ownership of utilities? How many percent do you gain for stopping Russian misinformation?

reply
upvoteby amelius7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The metric was carefully crafted by a group of experts as means of communicating a complicated topic.

I'm not going to discuss it further if you don't have anything substantial to bring to the table.

reply
upvoteby aleqs5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
'experts' lmao. Your entire argument boils down to an appeal to authority fallacy.
reply
upvoteby amelius3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
That fallacy does not apply here as the authority is legitimate and relevant.
reply
upvoteby kelnos2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
That's just your opinion, not fact.
reply
upvoteby aleqs1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Eric Cartman is that you?
reply
upvoteby tessier25015 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Yes! By all means, let us appeal to authority and use institutions' reputations to shut down any discussion, rather than thinking about what these figures actually mean, what criteria they're based on, or how well they reflect reality.

edit: wording

reply
upvoteby RobotToaster5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
An institution mostly funded by the governments it happens to rank highly, and the open society foundation that's owned by George Soros, a man who's been obsessed with overthrowing China's government since the 80s. https://www.v-dem.net/about/funders/
reply
upvoteby j_maffe8 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
They're not arguing against the institution. They're arguing against the metric .
reply
upvoteby amelius8 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Yeah but the metric was invented by that reputable organization and given the enormous difference it's not worth any discussion unless they come up with something good in which case they should probably publish about it.
reply
upvoteby aleqs5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
If you don't want to have a discussion don't post pointless metrics that you don't even understand.
reply
upvoteby lejalv6 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
They are arguing for you using your brain instead of tethering it to a number.
reply
upvoteby owebmaster5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
No he's arguing against your arguments and winning.
reply
upvoteby gnaritas992 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
[dead]
reply