• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Safety Risk .net

Humanising Safety and Embracing Real Risk

  • Home
    • About
      • Privacy Policy
      • Contact
  • FREE
    • FREE SAFETY eBOOKS
    • Free Hotel and Resort Risk Management Checklist
    • FREE DOWNLOADS
    • TOP 50
    • FREE RISK ASSESSMENT FORMS
    • Find a Safety Consultant
    • Free Safety Program Documents
    • Psychology Of Safety
    • Safety Ideas That Work
    • HEALTH and SAFETY MANUALS
    • FREE SAFE WORK METHOD STATEMENT RESOURCES
    • Whats New In Safety
    • FUN SAFETY STUFF
    • Health and Safety Training
    • SAFETY COURSES
    • Safety Training Needs Analysis and Matrix
    • Top 20 Safety Books
    • This Toaster Is Hot
    • Free Covid-19 Toolbox Talks
    • Download Page – Please Be Patient With Larger Files…….
    • SAFETY IMAGES, Photos, Unsafe Pictures and Funny Fails
    • How to Calculate TRIFR, LTIFR and Other Health and Safety Indicators
    • Download Safety Moments from Human Resources Secretariat
  • PSYCH. OF SAFETY & RISK
    • What is Psychological Safety at Work?
    • Safety Psychology Terminology
    • Some Basics on Social Psychology & Risk
    • Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk – Prof Karl E. Weick
    • The Psychology of Leadership in Risk
    • Conducting a Psychology and Culture Safety Walk
    • The Psychology of Conversion – 20 Tips to get Started
    • Understanding The Social Psychology of Risk And Safety
    • Psychology and safety
    • The Psychology of Safety
    • Hot Toaster
    • TALKING RISK VIDEOS
    • WHAT IS SAFETY
    • THE HOT TOASTER
    • THE ZERO HARM DEBATE
    • SEMIOTICS
    • LEADERSHIP
  • Robert Long
    • ALL POSTS
    • Learning Styles Matter
    • There is no HIERARCHY of Controls
    • Scaffolding, Readiness and ZPD in Learning
    • What Can Safety Learn From Playschool?
    • Presentation Tips for Safety People
    • Dialogue Do’s and Don’ts
    • It’s Only a Symbol
    • Ten Cautions About Safety Checklists
    • Zero is Unethical
    • First Report on Zero Survey
    • There is No Objectivity, Deal With it!
  • Slogans
    • Researchers Reveal the Top 10 Most Effective Safety Slogans Of All Time
    • When Slogans Don’t Work
    • CLASSIC, FAMOUS and INFAMOUS SAFETY QUOTES
    • BEST WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2022
    • CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
    • COVID-19 (Coronavirus, Omicron) Health and Safety Slogans and Quotes for the Workplace
    • Safety Acronyms
    • You know Where You Can Stick Your Safety Slogans
    • Sayings, Slogans, Aphorisms and the Discourse of Simple
    • Spanish Safety Slogans – Consignas de seguridad
    • Safety Slogans List
    • Road Safety Slogans 2022
    • How to write your own safety slogans
    • Why Are Safety Slogans Important
    • Safety Slogans Don’t Save Lives
    • 40 Free Safety Slogans For the Workplace
    • Safety Slogans for Work
  • Safety Culture
    • Safety Culture Silences
  • Psychological Safety
You are here: Home / Ethics / Fluffy Ethics and Safety

Fluffy Ethics and Safety

January 17, 2020 by Dr Rob Long 10 Comments

imageThere is nothing quite like a good façade to make sure nothing changes. Trot out some spin, drop a few definitions and Bob’s your uncle.

The best way to test fluffy ethics is to investigate the rigor in topics of interest and discussions of ontology, worldview, paradigms and methodology. A sure indicator of fluffy ethics comes when the language of ethics and morality are made inter-changeable (such as in the AIHS BoK on Ethics). Nothing is worse for developing an ethic than confusing morality with ethics. Both words have a completely different etymology and meaning and when understood Phenomenologically (Heidegger, Ricoeur ) can bring out a rich understanding of why there is such dissonance between what actions people theorise about and what they do. Definition is the foundation of thinking critically about actions and wisdom.

You can’t shy away from it. Any discussion of ethics, morality, justice, hermeneutics (theory of interpretation), politics and wisdom must be philosophical. Unfortunately, the avoidance of philosophy is something Safety does really well. Ignorance and confusion are the standard faire for Safety under the assumption that the subjectivities of risk are objective. Delusional.

You can also detect fluffy ethics when a position is not defined or owned. This masking not only helps hide the importance of philosophy but also masks real agendas and values. Doing so always helps maintain the status quo, in this case – zero.

In a real profession Ethics are front and centre in any curriculum, this is the case for: Law, Teaching, Nursing, Social Work, Medicine and host of helping professions. In the world of Safety compulsory mis-education, there is nothing.

If you don’t know how to think critically about ethics then you would have no coherent response to the thinking of Archbishop Coleridge (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-16/child-sex-abuse-catholic-church-confession-mark-coleridge/11872452). In order to understand Colleridge you need to understand his approach to ethics through the Catholic attachment to Aristotelian and Aquinas natural Law ethics. Otherwise, one just argues from emotivism (MacIntyre discusses the problems with emotivism in his work on After Virtue). You can’t get by on fluffy ethics.

When you don’t know how to think critically about ethics then you would have no coherent response to the thinking of the brutalism of the Government’s Robodebt strategy (https://www.mamamia.com.au/centrelink-robodebt-death/).

When you don’t know how to think critically about ethics then you would have no coherent response to the thinking of Climate Denial (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2016/01/09/why-climate-change-is-an-ethical-problem/Z).

Emotivism is what one ends up with when one is fed on fluffy ethics. And on a diet of fluffy ethics Safety is able to campaign on the unethical discourse of zero.

Fluffy ethics doesn’t help anyone make connections between ethical theory and moral action so we end up with binary nonsense that drives poor thinking and brutalism in the name of safety. Harming people emotionally, physically, mentally and socially in the name of decreased injuries is immoral. Telling fallible people they must be perfect is unethical. Brutalising people in the name of good is what you end up with when numeric are made the definition of safety. This is what the BoK on Ethics doesn’t address and leaves one with and nothing educative to help safety people think and act professionally.

  • Bio
  • Latest Posts
  • More about Rob
Dr Rob Long

Dr Rob Long

Expert in Social Psychology, Principal & Trainer at Human Dymensions
Dr Rob Long

Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)

  • Understanding Psychological Terminology - August 7, 2022
  • Risk Boldly - August 7, 2022
  • Poetics of the Self - August 7, 2022
  • Culture Silences in Safety – What Culture Isn’t - August 7, 2022
  • There is No Objectivity, Deal With it! - August 6, 2022
Dr Rob 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.

Please share our posts

  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)

Related

Filed Under: Ethics, Robert Long Tagged With: AIHS, Bok, climate denial, ethics

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:49 PM

    Knowledge is power and power, especially using absolutes such as zero harm or vision zero corrupts absolutely.

    Reply
  2. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:49 PM

    The use of ethics and morals synonymously is a cunning stunt which renders the entire AIHS BoK publication on ethics and professional practice somewhat meaningless. This political chicanery is yet another example of intellectual cowardice and obedience to the orthodoxy, which enables the Australian Institute of Heinrich and Skinner to disguise the dichotomy of the Friedman doctrine versus securing the health and safety of people at work.

    Abortion is legal and therefore medically ethical, while many people find it personally immoral. Fundamentalists, extremists, and even mainstream theists all have different ideas about morality that impact each of our lives, even if indirectly through social pressures or legal discrimination.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:56 PM

      Bernard, there are a host of matters hidden by making the terms interchangeable even though the document doesn’t do so. The language as it is used in the BoK makes a distinction in use so I don’t know what they were thinking. Closer to home, whilst ALARP is required under the Act and Regulation and one is expected to comply, the subjectivities of the concept and of all risk assessment includes moral interpretation by the user. This puts the user in an ethical dilemma between a requirement under the Act but no certainty in how to enact it. and so the user ends up with all these gobbeldygook numbers to which they attribute meaning that get quickly blown away in court because a lawyer understands jurisprudence. Another example is that organisations make it ethical (systemic) to award KPIs for safety numerics and yet the dynamic of that KPI encourages immoral behaviour. If the behaviour harms people then the law will quickly judge the KPI as unethical despite the fact that the organisation has made it legal. Of course, neither the AIHS or the BoK tackle this dilemma with integrity yet it is a glaring problem in the industry.

      Reply
  3. bernardcorden says

    February 13, 2020 at 6:49 PM

    https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-ethics-and-morals.htm

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      February 13, 2020 at 6:56 PM

      When all you have is ‘do the right thing’ or ‘common sense’ you truly have fallen for the simplistic view, such a delusion is blown away by the next accident. Ethicists know the richness of the linguistic difference between ethics and morals just as safety people make a distinction between risk and hazard. Those not in the safety world confuse the two, similar to those with a poor knowledge of ethics. The only trouble is, safety people are told by their training, like engineers, that they know everything.

      Reply
  4. bernardcorden says

    January 19, 2020 at 5:24 PM

    The use of ethics and morals synonymously is a cunning stunt which renders the entire AIHS BoK publication on ethics and professional practice somewhat meaningless. This political chicanery is yet another example of intellectual cowardice and obedience to the orthodoxy, which enables the Australian Institute of Heinrich and Skinner to disguise the dichotomy of the Friedman doctrine versus securing the health and safety of people at work.

    Abortion is legal and therefore medically ethical, while many people find it personally immoral. Fundamentalists, extremists, and even mainstream theists all have different ideas about morality that impact each of our lives, even if indirectly through social pressures or legal discrimination.

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      January 20, 2020 at 9:23 AM

      Bernard, there are a host of matters hidden by making the terms interchangeable even though the document doesn’t do so. The language as it is used in the BoK makes a distinction in use so I don’t know what they were thinking. Closer to home, whilst ALARP is required under the Act and Regulation and one is expected to comply, the subjectivities of the concept and of all risk assessment includes moral interpretation by the user. This puts the user in an ethical dilemma between a requirement under the Act but no certainty in how to enact it. and so the user ends up with all these gobbeldygook numbers to which they attribute meaning that get quickly blown away in court because a lawyer understands jurisprudence. Another example is that organisations make it ethical (systemic) to award KPIs for safety numerics and yet the dynamic of that KPI encourages immoral behaviour. If the behaviour harms people then the law will quickly judge the KPI as unethical despite the fact that the organisation has made it legal. Of course, neither the AIHS or the BoK tackle this dilemma with integrity yet it is a glaring problem in the industry.

      Reply
  5. bernardcorden says

    January 19, 2020 at 9:12 AM

    Knowledge is power and power, especially using absolutes such as zero harm or vision zero corrupts absolutely.

    Reply
  6. bernardcorden says

    January 17, 2020 at 9:43 PM

    https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-ethics-and-morals.htm

    Reply
    • Rob Long says

      January 18, 2020 at 6:59 AM

      When all you have is ‘do the right thing’ or ‘common sense’ you truly have fallen for the simplistic view, such a delusion is blown away by the next accident. Ethicists know the richness of the linguistic difference between ethics and morals just as safety people make a distinction between risk and hazard. Those not in the safety world confuse the two, similar to those with a poor knowledge of ethics. The only trouble is, safety people are told by their training, like engineers, that they know everything.

      Reply

Leave a Reply to bernardcorden Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Search and Discover More on this Site

Never miss a post - Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address and join other discerning risk and safety people who receive notifications of new posts by email

Join 7,464 other subscribers

VIRAL POST!!! HOW TO QUIT THE SAFETY INDUSTRY

NEW! Free Download

Please take our 2 minute zero survey

Recent Comments

  • Amy Saunders on Quick Tips for Preventing Electrical Issues in the Workplace
  • Michael on Construction Risk Assessments
  • Rob Long on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Wynand on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Brian Edwin Darlington on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Brian Edwin Darlington on Culture Silences in Safety – What Culture Isn’t
  • Rob Long on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Rob Long on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Brent Charlton on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Richard Brookes on How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Rob Long on The Rhizome as a Learning Model for Risk
  • Ooker on The Rhizome as a Learning Model for Risk
  • Rob Long on Safety Doesn’t Need Military Language
  • Manjit Handa on Safety Doesn’t Need Military Language
  • Rob Long on Why Safety is Attracted to Behaviourism
  • Ricardo Montero on Why Safety is Attracted to Behaviourism
  • Admin on Culture Silences in Safety – Ritual
  • Anonymous on Culture Silences in Safety – Ritual
  • Rob Long on Cultural Silences in Safety – Power and Politics
  • Admin on Cultural Silences in Safety – Power and Politics

FREE eBOOK DOWNLOADS

Footer

Top Posts & Pages. Sad that most are so dumb but this is what safety luves

  • Free Safety Moments and Toolbox Talk Examples, Tips and Resources
  • BEST WORKPLACE HEALTH and SAFETY SLOGANS 2022
  • Road Safety Slogans 2022
  • CATCHY and FUNNY SAFETY SLOGANS FOR THE WORKPLACE
  • Download Safety Moments from Human Resources Secretariat
  • FREE RISK ASSESSMENT FORMS, CHECKISTS, REGISTERS, TEMPLATES and APPS
  • 15 Safety Precautions When Working With Electricity
  • What Is Safety?
  • COVID-19 (Coronavirus, Omicron) Health and Safety Slogans and Quotes for the Workplace
  • Free Risk Assessment Template in Excel Format

Recent Posts

  • Understanding Psychological Terminology
  • Risk Boldly
  • Poetics of the Self
  • Culture Silences in Safety – What Culture Isn’t
  • There is No Objectivity, Deal With it!
  • When Only More Guilt Will Do
  • How to Leave the Safety Industry
  • Keep Counting Every Time You Don’t Achieve Your Goal, That’s Professional
  • Safety and Non-Neuroscience
  • Paperwork and Usability in Tackling Risk
  • Safety as a Masculinist Activity
  • You Don’t Want a Compliance Culture
  • The Soul of Mental Health
  • Identity and Safety
  • Psychosocial Controls and Measures for Who?
  • Linguistics and Safety
  • Not a Profession’s Bootlace
  • Cultural Silences in Safety – Power and Politics
  • History and Safety
  • What is Psychosocial Safety
  • A Guide to Psychosocial Safety Skills
  • Doing Away With Health and Safety–Language and People
  • The New Enemy of Safety – The Unconscious
  • Tape Down Those Leads
  • More Safety Code to Disguise Behaviourism
  • Why Safety is Attracted to Behaviourism
  • Safety Culture–Hudson’s Model
  • Understanding Safety as an Archetype
  • The Purpose of Safety
  • Learning Styles Matter
  • Due Diligence and Holistic Ergonomics Workshops
  • Having FUN in Safety FUNdamentalism
  • 80% of Safety Practitioners Are Idiots
  • Risk Homeostasis Theory–Why Safety Initiatives Go Wrong
  • Culture Silences in Safety – Semiotics
  • Flooding is Dangerous, and I don’t Mean the Water….
  • Cultural Silences in Safety – Aesthetics
  • What Can Safety Learn From Playschool?
  • Risky Conversations, The Law, Social Psychology and Risk
  • Due Diligence Videos – 10000 downloads
  • Release the Safety Monster and Wreck a Good TV Show
  • Paper Safe
  • Safety Starts with Us
  • Investigations and Heuristics
  • Barry’s Latest Safety Innovation Discovery
  • The Human Race…
  • The ASSP Getting Complacency Completely Wrong
  • What in the (Risk & Safety) World is Imagination?
  • Understanding Safety Myths
  • Cultural Silences in Safety – Empathy

FEATURED POSTS

Safety – Just a Few Bad Apples

ACTOR + ACTION + TIME = EVENT

Daydreaming and Safety

Spin, Nonsense Language and Propaganda in Safety

Managing Risk Rather Than Striving for Absolute Safety

The Triarchic Mind, Risk and Safety

Predictably Arational, Safety as a Superstition

Ten Risk and Safety Program Essentials

Study Social Psychology of Risk Online in 2018

Question for the Safety Thinkers

The Immediacy of Zero

In Praise of Balance in Risk and the Threat of Extremism

Words Can Change Your Brain

A Parallel Universe in Safety

‘Pause and Ponder’ – what we can learn from social psychology academics

Who is the Enemy and What War is Safety Fighting?

Data Cannot Drive Vision

The Link Between Think and Blink

Why Resilience Cannot be Engineered

Human Factors Factors

Understanding Safety as an Archetype

Be Alert, Safety Needs More Lerts

Resilience and Safety

A Conference with a Difference

The Mystery of the Emotions

Critical Thinking and Questioning in Safety

The Challenge of Social Sensemaking in Risk

There is no way I would do that!

Desensitization, Statistics and the Psychic Numbing of Numerics

Post Graduate Diploma in Psychology of Risk Commences

Shock and Fear in Safety

Social Psychology of Risk Two Day Workshop

The Less You See, the More Likely to Die

Why Safety Controls Don’t Always Work

How to Do the Best Risk Assessment

The Psychology of Leadership in Risk

New Video Explains Cognitive Dissonance and Safety

Safety-as-Persona

People Skills Are Not Soft Skills

First in Best Dressed for Indoctrination

More Posts from this Category

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address and join other discerning risk and safety people who receive notifications of new posts by email

Join 7,464 other subscribers

How we pay for the high cost of running of this site – try it for free on your site

What is Psychological Safety at Work?