Firstly, it is logically necessary that, in any ranking, some members should be at the bottom and some at the top - this is the meaning of a ranking.

Secondly - and this is more important - the statement "Bangladesh is the most corrupt country in the world," says nothing about Bangladesh. To maintain that it states a quality of Bangladesh is to confuse a relation with a quality.

Let me illustrate. "Everest is the highest mountain in the world," says nothing about Everest. It is not a quality of Everest that it is the highest mountain in the world. It is a relationship between Everest and other mountains. On the other hand, if I say, "Everest is 29,029 feet high," then I'm stating a quality of the mountain. I'm saying something about Everest, and not about other mountains. In short, the former proposition states a relation; the latter states a quality.

Therefore, the statement "Bangladesh is the most corrupt country", says nothing about Bangladesh. If we observe that "Bangladesh is a poor country," or "Bangladesh is a tropical country," then we are stating its qualities.

Unfortunately, we seem to believe that TI's finding that Bangladesh is the most corrupt nation says something about Bangladesh. Nothing could be further from the truth. It says nothing about Bangladesh. Therefore, the entire exercise on the part of TI is a vacuous enterprise.

As one philosopher put it, "The worse your logic, the more interesting the conclusions...."