Diseases are also said to 'progress'.

A fully secular parliament and society would herald true progress in any country.
Without the interference of religion in any decision made at an official level, our country can only improve.

For a crocodile, 'progress' consists of all animals (humans included) standing in line on the water-edge, asking to be eaten.

For a paedophile, 'progress' consists of all children standing in line in front of their doorstep with their pants down, plus government-payouts per molestation.

For Hitler, 'progress' consisted of cleansing the world of Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and the mentally-infirm.

For Pol Pot, 'progress' consisted of cleansing the world of city-dwellers and anyone who can read.

It seems that for some OLO members, 'progress' consists of the elimination of the people of God and the spiritual destruction of their offspring by forcefully contaminating their young minds with materialistic indoctrination and their young bodies with the injection of foreign materials into their blood-stream.

Yuyutsu,
Very valid points. I'd like to add that Australia could make huge progress if academics & bureaucrats were required to earn their keep rather than make careers out of exploiting the taxpayer.

Suseonline, "A fully secular parliament and society would herald true progress in any country"

Does that also apply to Bob Brown's and the Greens' nutty envirospiritualism? Their religious fervor for Gaia? One world government on that basis with Bob Brown as self-nominated President? LOL

Little green men inseminating women and then zooming off to another Galaxy somewhere to do the same dirty deed? Where oh where was the CSA when wonderful womyn wanted them?

Subjective preferences consist of ordinal data, whereas measurement consists of cardinal data. This means that the entire methodology of seeking to measure progress is fallacious.

You can't get a kilogram of happiness. Talk of gross national happiness is just confused nonsense.

Furthermore, statistics only show correlation, not causation.

Because the very methodology of measuring progress is fallacious, the result of any such discussion on measuring progress is just everyone piping in with their different incommensurate opinions, as we have just seen above: the fascists of all stripes eager to use government to force everyone else to do what they want, and point to whatever facile statistic they think will justify it.

As for the ultimate aim of measuring progress, namely the satisfaction of more important human wants, all we can logically say is that people place a higher value on wants the satisfaction of which they consider more urgent or important, and a lesser value on wants the satisfaction of which they consider less urgent or important.

But obviously it's nonsense to say people place a higher value on things they had to be forced into doing, and what else has government to offer but force? Everything else - all the knowledge, morality and resources - society already has.

Thus the highest moral and social value is freedom. Everything else is just people trying to use the State to force others to pay for their own preferences.

How about progress towards freedom?