<p>
</p>
<p>that’s an incredibly odd way of using a priori. A priori means knowledge without experience. I’m not sure how you can experience a methodology. Perhaps you meant necessarily? Unlike what kant thought, they’re not analogous, as was shown by kripke’s a posteriori necessary truths (e.g. “water is H20” which is known through experience since chemists, using an experiment, concluded that water is chemically H20. So necessarily, every instance of water will be H20. This is a very odd tangent, but this is what i’m working on in my finals right now so i just thought i’d throw it out there 
)</p>
<p>You can criticize a part of the methodology in how it relates to the rankings. And from that, infer that the ranking is garbage. (as i did) The ‘quality of life’ is a highly subjective and it accounts for 30% of the ranking.</p>