Jere Lull wrote:
On 2008-01-28 22:07:46 -0500, Stephen Trapani
said:

Jere Lull wrote:
On 2008-01-27 23:35:28 -0500, Stephen Trapani
said:

"Best" is not objective. It's subjective. The choice of statistics
to include or exclude is based upon the measurer's biases, so the
results will be as well.

I disagree. For example, there is a sailboat that handles blue water
best, objectively, all other things being equal.

Despite that I was commenting on "best country", there isn't even a
truly objective measure of the best blue water boat ;-)

Some say crab crusher, some say cat; both may be right -- for
themselves.

I may have been too general. There is one model that is best at
handling pounding forces without breaking up. There is one model that
is best at being steady in rough water. There is one model that uses
the wind best. There is one model that has the best living
accomodations, etc.

And, depending on which the "measurer" deems most important, quite
different boats become "best".

Depending upon which the measurer deems most important, different boats
become the best to them, right, but that doesn't change which boat is
objectively best.

If you measure all the factors objectively there will be one that ranks
best over them all, even combining all the factors, but some may not
want the overall best, maybe one doesn't care about the interior
accommodations, say, but wants the strongest boat. But this doesn't
change that there is an objectively best boat, just like it doesn't
change that there is an objectively best country, no matter how many
morons there are in it that can't appreciate it.

I'm not intending to beat on you, just using your posts to demonstrate
my point.

Good discussion, but it demonstrates my point. The subjective tastes of
measurers or observers can not change the objective quality of anything
one iota.

Stephen