• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Islamic countries?

Treks

Well-Known Member
Coming from here in this thread: Why be muslim? | Page 8 | ReligiousForums.com

Why do countries that Wikipedia indicates apply Sharia law to various degrees (here Application of sharia law by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia rate as less 'Islamic' than this paper indicates http://www.ahmad-juhaidi.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/how-islamic-islamic-countries.pdf, at Appendix 2)?

The conclusion of that paper says:
CONCLUDING REMARKS We have outlined what we believe to be the essential teachings of Islam on what constitutes an Islamic society and an Islamic economic system. A casual observer would conclude that the adoption and implementation of such a system—respect for human rights, social and economic justice, hard work, equal opportunity for all to develop, absence of corruption, absence of waste and hoarding, ethical business practices, well-functioning markets, a legitimate political authority— should result in flourishing economies. These teachings, not the actual practice of those that are labeled as Muslim, should be the basis for judging a society’s pretensions to Islamicity.

Our very preliminary results show that Islamic countries are not as Islamic in their practice as one might expect; instead it appears that the most developed countries tend to place higher on our preliminary Islamicity Index.

Given our results, one can surmise that the lack of economic, financial, political, legal, and social development can be attributed to age-old problems of developing countries, such as inefficient institutions, bad economic policies, corruption, underdeveloped rule of law and equity, economic and social systems failing woman and children, and other traditional developing country diseases. It is, in fact, the shortcomings of the governments and their respective policies, not religion, that account for the dismal economic, financial, political, legal, and social developments and progress in the Middle East (even those blessed with oil). This is further reinforced by the Islamic economic, financial, political, legal, and social principles represented by 67 proxies used in the IslamicityIndex. If examined closely, all 67 proxies of the Index are standard practices of good governance and good economic, financial, political, legal, and social policies, applicable to any country regardless of religious orientation.

We do, however, strongly emphasize that these are preliminary results that not only require additional data for variables that represent Islamic principles but also require extensive refinement in methodology. It is difficult at this time to draw more concrete conclusions other than to say that it is our belief that most self-declared and labeled Islamic countries are not conducting their affairs in accordance with Islamic teachings – at least when it comes to economic, financial, political, legal, social and governance policies."

Do you agree? Why doesn't a more developed Middle Eastern country like, Qatar, rank higher on this Islamicity Index?

A thank you to @0ne-answer for providing the link to the paper.
 
Last edited:

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
This (from page #3, actually the sixth of the PDF) may be of interest.

There are only seven declared Islamic countries (Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iran, Mauritania, Oman, Pakistan, Yemen) and only twelve countries that have declared Islam as the state religion (Algeria, Bangladesh, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Morocco, Qatar, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates).

From pages #13-14:

The following sections below provide a brief description and methodology of measurement of the individual four indices that make up the IslamicityIndex (I2 ):
  1. Economic Islamicity Index (EI2 ),
  2. Legal and Governance Islamicity Index (LGI2 ),
  3. Human and Political Rights Islamicity Index (HPI2 ), and
  4. International Relations Islamicity Index (IRI2 ).
With the above four indexes combined we create our IslamicityIndex: I 2 = (EI2 )+(LGI2 )+(HPI2 )+(IRI2 ).

Note that the four individual component indexes are squared before addition, probably in order to value the overall balance of all four fields,

A quick glance brings me the following:

  • The Economic index sure looks reasonable, in intent at the very least
  • The Legal and Governance index does not do nearly so well, but that was to be expected
  • Nor does the Human and Political Rights index. I want to take a closer look to check what their understanding of such rights will be like.
  • It is interesting that environmental considerations enter the International Relations index, as opposed to the Economic or Human and Political Rights ones.
  • I definitely must take a closer look on how they define and gauge Globalization for the International Relations index. Sight unseen, I have no idea.
  • Ditto, to a lesser degree, to the Military Expenses elements. I expect and hope the index to value a low degree of those expenses, but I have been burned on similar expectations before.
 
Last edited:

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Coming from here in this thread: Why be muslim? | Page 8 | ReligiousForums.com

Why do countries that Wikipedia indicates apply Sharia law to various degrees (here Application of sharia law by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia rate as less 'Islamic' than this paper indicates http://www.ahmad-juhaidi.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/how-islamic-islamic-countries.pdf, at Appendix 2)?

The conclusion of that paper says:


Do you agree? Why doesn't a more developed Middle Eastern country like, Qatar, rank higher on this Islamicity Index?

A thank you to @0ne-answer for providing the link to the paper.

Right off bat you can see it is going to be terrible:

"Abstract

In the post 9/11 era, there is growing interest in the complex relationship between religion, economics, finance, politics, law, and social behavior. This has brought with it a disagreement on how to investigate the impact of religiosity, whether religion affects the economic, political, and social outlook of countries or whether these factors affect religiosity? In other words, should religion be viewed as a dependent or an independent variable? In this paper we ask what we believe to be the precursor question to such linkages, namely, do self-declared Islamic countries, as attested by membership in the OIC (Organization of Islamic Conference), embrace policies that are founded on Islamic teachings? We believe that only once this question is addressed can one begin to estimate how Islam adherence to Islam may affect economic, political and social behavior. In the first part of the paper we present what we believe should be the characteristics and scaffolding of an “Islamic” country. We base our depiction on the Quran, and the life, practices and sayings of the Prophet Mohammad – the two principal channels that provide Muslims with the road map. In the second part, we develop an index to measure the “Islamicity” of Islamic and non-Islamic countries. This IslamicityIndex (or I2 ) measures 208 countries adherence to Islamic principles using four sub-indices related to economics, legal and governance, human and political rights, and international relations."

In other words, they are not relying on a consensus from the muslim communities. They are relying on their own interpretation of the scriptures to determine how a islamic country should look like.

To add insult to injury, rather than using markers unique to Islam ( or uncommon to other religions/ideologies ) , they have decided to use a lot of completely ambiguous factors to determine how islamic a country is. This is how they have ended up with New Zealand, Luxembourg, Iceland, Ireland, and Finland at the top of the list.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Interestingly, Saudi Arabia (131), Indonesia (140) and Lebanon (158), all to some degree a reference on Muslim populations, have not made the short list of nineteen officially Muslim states. Nor have many African countries that are generally perceived as having a Muslim culture.

Further on, the text mentions the Organization of Islamic Countries (OIC), that has (according to Wikipedia) 57 member states.

So how do the the OIC member states and the nineteen named countries that declare themselves Islamic and/or as having Islam as an Estate Religion fare on that list?

This subset is composed of the OIC members in the list (according to the study), except where noted.

In order of increasing Islamicity according to the list (bolded entries indicate countries from the short list of nineteen):

Malaysia (38)
Kuwait (48)
Bahrain (64)
Brunei (65)
United Arab Emirates 66
Uganda 73
Gabon 75
Jordan 77
Tunisia 83
Guyana 94
Mozambique 96
Oman 99
Suriname 100
Turkey 103
Maldives 104
Kazakhstan 107
Senegal 109
Albania 110
Qatar 112
Morocco 119
Gambia 124
Azerbaijan 125
Mali 130
Saudi Arabia 131
Burkina Faso 132
Kyrgyz Republic 137
Indonesia 140
Guinea 145
Benin 147
Pakistan 147
Bangladesh 152
Egypt 153
Lebanon 158
Algeria 160
Cameroon 162
Iran 163
Sierra Leone 168
Afghanistan 169
Togo 172
Turkmenistan 173
Nigeria 174
Uzbekistan 174
Tajikistan 176
Cote d'Ivoire 179
Syrian Arab Republic 186
Niger 189
Guinea-Bissau 190
Djibouti 193
Mauritania 195
Libya 196
Chad 197
Yemen 198
Iraq 201 (not a member of the OIC, according to the study)
Sudan 202
Somalia 206
West Bank and Gaza 207 (not a member of the OIC, according to the study)
Mayotte 208 (not a member of the OIC, according to the study)


By contrast, here is a selection of "non-Muslim" countries from the same list. Both the choice of countries and of bolded entries are mine, not the study's:

New Zealand 1
Luxembourg 2
Ireland 3
Iceland 4
Finland 5
Denmark 6
Canada 7
U.K. 8
Australia 9
Netherlands 9
Austria 11
Norway 12
Switzerland 13
Belgium 14
Sweden 15
Portugal 16
Germany 17
Bahamas 18
France 18
Czech Rep 20
Estonia 21
Costa Rica 22
Spain 23
Barbados 24
USA 25
Slovenia 26
Hong Kong 27
Latvia 28
Japan 29
Italy 33
Chile 34
Greece 46
Uruguay 48
South Africa 50
Argentina 54
Brazil 55
Mexico 55
El Salvador 58
Israel 61
China 81
Nicaragua 81
Colombia 86
Dominican Republic 87
Peru 88
Colombia 86
Dominican Republic 87
Peru 88
India 89
Russian Federation 91
Cuba 149
Myanmar 164
Haiti 176
Eritrea 204
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
If the first fifteen entries are any indication, Islamicity is not something to much miss.
More islamic.

Are you sure? I am fairly certain that it is the opposite. The list is not lacking on surprises, but it would be sort of odd to see a claim that (for one example) Pakistan and Bangladesh are both considerably less Islamic than India, as are Iran and Iraq. I very much expect they would doubt their own results and revise their methodology before saying such a thing.
 
Last edited:

Koldo

Outstanding Member
If the first fifteen entries are any indication, Islamicity is not something to much miss.


Are you sure? I am fairly certain that it is the opposite.

"Our very preliminary results show that Islamic countries are not as Islamic in their practice as one might expect; instead it appears that the most developed countries tend to place higher on our preliminary IslamicityIndex."

I am quite sure.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Color me surprised. Pages #18-20 seem to support your view, not mine.

That is certainly disconcerting. It looks this close to a statement that the best way of attaining Islam is not to attempt to pursue it.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member
If the first fifteen entries are any indication, Islamicity is not something to much miss.


Are you sure? I am fairly certain that it is the opposite. The list is not lacking on surprises, but it would be sort of odd to see a claim that (for one example) Pakistan and Bangladesh are both considerably less Islamic than India, as are Iran and Iraq. I very much expect they would doubt their own results and revise their methodology before saying such a thing.

Actually, they got exactly what they wanted. They wanted to show Islam as not being the reason as to why those Islamic countries have several problems, they wanted to put the blame elsewhere:

"Given our results, one can surmise that the lack of economic, financial, political, legal, and social development can be attributed to age-old problems of developing countries, such as inefficient institutions, bad economic policies, corruption, underdeveloped rule of law and equity, economic and social systems failing woman and children, and other traditional developing country diseases. It is, in fact, the shortcomings of the governments and their respective policies, not 20 Global Economy Journal, Vol. 10 [2010], Iss. 2, Art. 2 Global Economy Journal DOI: 10.2202/1524-5861.1614religion, that account for the dismal economic, financial, political, legal, and social developments and progress in the Middle East (even those blessed with oil). This is further reinforced by the Islamic economic, financial, political, legal, and social principles represented by 67 proxies used in the IslamicityIndex. If examined closely, all 67 proxies of the Index are standard practices of good governance and good economic, financial, political, legal, and social policies, applicable to any country regardless of religious orientation."
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Fair point. Not that I want to revise my previous post, mind you. But fair point all the same.
 
Top