Robert Long

A Safety Theory of Knowing, Free Workshops on Safety Beliefs, July.

ByProf. Robert Long

The study of Epistemology (theory of knowing) is foundational to philosophical study. Yet, if Safety were to give these value, they would change the way Safety works.

The foundational question of Epistemology is: how do you know what you know?

If you have the courage to get started on this tough question, you can read here:

Other questions that concern Epistemology are:

  • What is knowledge?
  • What are our sources of knowledge?
  • What do we know?
  • Why do we know it?
  • Is there a difference between opinion, research, knowledge and wisdom?
  • Can we know by experience?
  • What can we know by rationality or logic?
  • Does Science prove knowledge?

Theories of knowledge are anchored to Philosophy and Ethics and are not on the curriculum of any safety qualification. Indeed, these disciplines are often held in distain by Safety as irrelevant to the work of safety. Don’t you know, the Act, Regulations, Standards and Safety Body of Knowledge are objective and impartial? See below the Australian Institute of Health and Safety non code of ethics.

How remarkable. Is safety conducted by humans?

When we look at what Safety considers a ‘body of knowledge’, what is in and what is out? Just think of all the things Safety is silent about? (https://safetyrisk.net/safety-culture-silences/).

Just think of all the things Safety makes taboo? (https://safetyrisk.net/censorship-and-taboos-in-safety/). These are not constructed consciously but are generated through: Indoctrination (https://safetyrisk.net/first-in-best-dressed-for-indoctrination/), repetition, curriculum, cultural powers, norms and energies, in-groupness, conferences and a host of unconscious factors that all show up on places like Linkedin, where safety AI slop is alive and well.

If one thinks critically about the Indoctrination in safety, the many accepted assumptions about knowing and belief are significant, here is a list: https://safetyrisk.net/overcoming-safety-indoctrination/. Just consider some safety beliefs like the Hierarchy of Control, the Risk Matrix, Heinrich Dominoes, Bradley Curve and Swiss-Cheese. All of these semiotic models are founded on an undisclosed belief/ theory of knowledge. For example, that life is linear and hierarchical. Or, that perfection is possible, risk is knowable, certainty is possible and risk is preventable.

Most of these beliefs are based on a deontological view (natural law and common sense) of the world but there are other valid views, they are just not presented in safety. And if you do present an alternative view, you are quickly made anti-safety. This addiction to compliance and obedience is part of the deontological worldview. Much of the Epistemology of Safety is anchored to Descartes and Kant, even though few could articulate what that means. It’s also another characteristic of safety culture that one rejects ‘big words’.

And this keeps safety all safe and snug, inside its own bubble and far away from a Transdisciplinary approach to risk.

The last thing Safety wants to hear is that most of what it believes is subjective, made up and un-testable. Indeed, even the Safety belief in measurement only tests what can be measured, it has no interest in the host of ethical, moral, psychological, cultural and social-psychological factors that can’t be measured. Eg. trust, care.

The myth of ‘you can’t manage what you can’t measure’ is equally challenged by the meme ‘you can’t count what counts’.

Imagine you were born into a Hindu or Buddhist culture, what might you believe then? Is such a worldview less valid than a Western view? What if one believed in a circular rather than a linear view of life?

There are indeed, various views of theories of knowledge that don’t align with the safety worldview or the western worldview (https://safetyrisk.net/the-safety-world-view-and-the-worldview-of-safety/). Are you open to the fact that other worldviews like SPoR (https://safetyrisk.net/understanding-the-spor-worldview/) are just as valid and coherent? Perhaps more coherent.

So, if you would like to study the nature of Epistemology or a different view on belief, you are welcome to join our free workshops in July. Simply apply by writing to admin@spor.com.au

 

Prof. Robert Long

Prof. Robert Long

Expert in Social Psychology, Principal & Trainer at Human Dymensions
Prof. Robert Long
PhD., MEd., MOH., BEd., BTh., Dip T., Dip Min., Cert IV TAA, MRMIA Rob is the founder of Human Dymensions and has extensive experience, qualifications and expertise across a range of sectors including government, education, corporate, industry and community sectors over 30 years. Rob has worked at all levels of the education and training sector including serving on various post graduate executive, post graduate supervision, post graduate course design and implementation programs.

Do you have any thoughts? Please share them below