Originally posted on May 21, 2019 @ 8:48 AM
Real Risk for Real Life
The problems of death and time lay at the heart of all religious consciousness. This is why Risk and Safety are fundamentally religious activities. Risk and Safety are all about ‘risk from’ and ‘safety to’. Risk and Safety are about freedom from death which is inevitable in time. Anything else is the denial of mortality, ﬁnitude, vulnerability and fallibility. Talking as if human living is eternally immune from harm is the grand delusion of having zero vision. When one has zero vision then Death and Time are made the enemy, they must be feared and fought. This is the delusion of the language of immortality, so attractive yet we buy life insurance policies.
One of the delights of growing old is observing new life, learning and development. I was with my grandson last week who is just merging from crawling to walking, such an amazing transition and a privilege to watch how he learns so quickly through mimetics. Language is a long way away. Later his language will simply anchor to what he already knows. Studies in child development teach us so much about ourselves, as does the ﬁrst illness and ﬁrst fall, it doesn’t take long for a child to learn they are fallible, vulnerable and mortal.
The parent knows vulnerability and fallibility acutely and spends most of their time ensuring the safety of their child because they know just how mortal children are. This is why parents don’t speak nonsense to their children, they don’t speak about zero harm because they know how idiotic it is. They want their child to know about real life and about real risk (https:// www.humandymensions.com/product/real-risk/). The language children hear before they can speak is ‘upsie daisy’, ‘there there’, ‘oh oh’, ‘never mind’ and other sounds and gestures that help children accept the inevitability of harm.
When my granddaughter comes over she proudly shows me her latest ‘owie’, that’s what she calls a cut or abrasion. Last time it was the cat that scratched her on the nose, before that she fell down some steps. Just as well children’s bodies and bones are made for harm. Her little 2 year old body mends much more quickly than mine. That’s the reality of aging. We see in these little ones the development of resilience, and we know if they don’t learn to be resilient that life will crush them. There’s a lot more harm to come and they need to be ready for it.
Why is it then that the moment one is baptised into Safety that all this sense turns into nonsense? And because it doesn’t make sense, Safety turns to religion and faith in zero.
The poets, artists and musicians capture so well the problem of death and time.
John Donne in the seventeenth century captured the problem so well in ‘Death Be Not Proud’. (https://poets.org/poem/death-be-not-proud-holy-sonnet-10) Donne sets out the problem of death, time and humanity in this 14 line sonnet. In the middle of typhoid fever he talks to the archetype Death and proposes that even Death is trapped in its own decay whereas those who sleep arise to eternal life.
The Beatles captured the nature of death in their famous hit ‘Let it Be’. McCartney talks to Mother Mary on the inevitability of death proposing that there is no sense in ﬁghting it. Indeed, to speak about letting things be is ‘words of wisdom’ (https://genius.com/The-beatles-let-it-be-lyrics).
Dali captures the challenges of death in Ballerina in a Death’s Head (https:// www.dalipaintings.com/ballerina-in-a-death-head.jsp). Here Dalí captures the ambiguity of death in life and the illusion of eternal life.
One of the problems with the zero harm movement is that it has no language to make sense of life and death to people. The denial of harm is the denial of life and the focus of zero is not on Real Risk but petty risk. Every scratch and every bump must now be ampliﬁed. This is the psychological eﬀect of zero.
The moment Safety sets life as some binary discourse in the language of salvation, it must become religious. Zero is an ideology that must believe in the eternal, it has no language to accept harm and so has no choice but to speak nonsense to people. How odd then that we teach children to accept harm and then the moment they come into Safety they learn to deny it! Indeed, Safety then punishes people for it.
Imagine what would happen if we punished children for being harmed? What kind of dysfunctional children would that would create? The immaturity of Safety immersed in zero harm ideology is not even childish.