Celebrating the Joy of Inefficiencies in Safety
One of the grand myths of AI is the promise of greater efficiency. It is a myth because its symbols are mostly about people as machines, cogs (https://safetyrisk.net/its-all-in-the-cogs-for-safety/) and robots. All myth is about making a symbol/representation as true. Here are a few examples:
None of this is true nor real. Humans are not machines and AI can never be ‘human’. Indeed, any projection of consciousness onto a machine or computer simply demonstrates complete ignorance about what it is to be a human ‘being’ (I’d suggest reading Damasio, Fuchs or Johnson as a start)
This is how myth is created, by the constant bombardment of myth as symbol and symbol as myth. Myth is not about falsehood or fairy-tale but rather attribution of meaning to symbol/representation.
The saturation of these symbol/myths about AI in safety is extensive, all to convince that somehow there is some kind of ‘revolution’ happening. The anchoring of the word ‘revolution’ to all this stuff is just more myth.
Since when is innovation about cogs? Since when are mechanistic metaphors the conduit to creativity, discovery and innovation? No wonder safety differently has nothing other than slogans to market. Don’t buy the cool-aid.
At the soul of all this stuff we have the myth of efficiency, that promises its own self-delusional promise that a mechanised future is better. Has any stopped in safety for just a second and asked some key questions about all of this?
- Where is the power located in these myths?
- What do these myths symbolise about humans?
- How are persons portrayed in these myths?
- How does AI create?
- What is the revolution?
At the heart of safety is the task of: helping, being with, sharing, caring and advising. These functions require an emotional, fallible person whose body resonates with others, knows about life experience and the inter-subjectivity of feeling in risk. No machine of computer can ever do this. The best way to demolish the myths of AI as persons is to ask the machine if it loves its own dreams. Ah yes, but the machine can do many things quicker than a human. So what?
Let’s take for example, the simple cup of coffee moment. What is efficient about spending 30 minutes in conversation about life with someone? Nothing much really, because the outcome is not measurable but rather relational and qualitative.
The quest in safety should NOT be about efficiency but rather Socialitie. AI can never be social because it can never be a person. In Socialitie we engage with others in our humanness – we listen, we empathise, we cry, share dreams, talk about stories, music and movies we saw. We share about hobbies, children and problems at school. None of this is efficient. None of this contributes to ‘getting the job done’ but it is vital for developing a workplace where trust, relationship and living, over-rides an obsession with ‘outputs’.
All these image/myths about efficiency (what Ellul calls Technique) thrust upon safety, simply help endorse the myths of deontology (duty to safety) and behaviourism (outputs before persons). Both these ideologies are destructive and anti-human and yet, Safety loves them. How delightful it must be to write an end of month report about declining injury rates and control measures??? But what do they know about the trauma suffered by Susan because she is bullied passively on the job? And, the accident happened because Tom can’t be trusted?
The best safety person is NOT the one who seeks outcomes, performance (HOP) and efficiencies. The best safety person is the one who builds relationships, understands persons and gets alongside people in the way they tackle risk.
The truth is, safety should be a job of inefficiencies. Spending time with people and listening is NOT ‘wasting time’. If this is projected onto a safety person then the problem is with management, not safety.
It’s time to get out of that organisation and do safety where the joys of inefficiency can be celebrated.
Prof. Robert Long
Latest posts by Prof. Robert Long (see all)
- Following-Leading in Risk, Supplement. Free Download - September 7, 2026
- Safety Culture and the Culture of Safety - September 6, 2026
- Safety, Creating Order Out of Disorder - September 4, 2026
- The Meaning of Risk - September 4, 2026
- A Beginners Guide to Enactivism in Risk - September 4, 2026