Symbols Can be Useful But Are Not ‘True’

One of the first things one learns in the use of signs and symbol systems is that all graphics, models and symbolics are subjective and are used to validate a methodology. In this way one can declare something as mythically true or symbolically true but not true in an evidential or philosophical sense.

Some of the favourite semiotics for Safety are:

• The swiss-cheese
• Dominoes
• Pyramids
• Bradley Curve
• Risk Matrix
• Bow-tie
• Zero

None of these symbols are ‘true’. All of these models and graphics have been concocted to try and validate an undeclared methodology in order to make a theory mythically and semiotically true.

But none of these are true in a scientific sense. Signs and symbol systems are not part of science and cannot be validated scientifically. Semiotics don’t work in a regime of validation by evidence. However, they can be extraordinarily effective as evaluated by cultural and non-measurable outcomes.

For example, no-one would doubt the effectiveness of the sw@stik@ to invoke fear and power in World War 2. No-one would doubt the power of a national flag to invoke conflict and patriotic nationalism. No-one would doubt the symbol of the cross to move the belief of Christians. Yet, the effectiveness of these semiotics cannot be measured or scientifically validated. Similar, other representations and symbols can be highly ineffective and achieve no outcome. We can see this with the success and failure of business brands.

Unfortunately, when we see a symbol, we don’t see the methodology behind it, even though it is a symbolic representation of a methodology. Often, allegiance and loyalty to a symbol is emotional not logical. Often belief in a symbol doesn’t involve any knowledge of the methodology behind it. This is how semiotics empowers the development of myth. Myth without semiotics has no power. Ideology without an image, lacks substance. Semeiotic myth is essential for religious belief and the attribution of making something sacred.

This is why the favourite models and graphics of safety have so much power but not the power of anything scientific. There is no evidence to substantiate the models that safety believes in.

James Reason made up the swiss-cheese but there is no evidence for it indeed, the evidence for how events unfold is the opposite. But the semiotic makes the symbol mythically true for those who want to believe it.

One would need some studies in semiotics, religious studies and mythology to know how this works. This is why a study of semiotics should be foundational to messaging in safety. Anyone claiming to be a mythologist, without extensive expertise in ethnology, religious studies and semiotics, is just a fraud. Similarly, engineers presenting lectures in ethics and learning are also frauds.

If you are interested in how semiotics creates myth perhaps start researching here:

• https://criticallegalthinking.com/2020/06/12/roland-barthes-myth/
• https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137301673_5
• https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781444396942.ch27
• https://www.academia.edu/101753651/The_Semiotic_of_Myth_A_Critical_Study_of_the_Symbol_Advances_in_Semiotics?uc-sb-sw=97087128

Yet, we see so much use of models and symbols in safety as if a model is somehow evidentially true. They are not.

Models and symbols are believed on a level very different than science and there is very little that is rational or logical about it.

For example: it is so easy to get Safety worked up about an object they have made sacred, yet there is nothing sacred in it. This dynamic and process of attribution of the sacred is explained in detail by Eliade (https://monoskop.org/images/b/b1/Eliade_Mircea_The_Sacred_and_The_profane_1963.pdf).

This is how safety gets itself all worked up into a religious lather when its sacred objects are questioned. This excitement clearly demonstrates the religiosity of Safety to its sacred objects.

If you would like to learn about semiotics and myth in risk and safety in a constructive, practical and positive way, you can study here: https://cllr.com.au/product/advanced-semiotics-masterclass-module-19-elearning/

• Bio
• Latest Posts
• More about Rob

Dr Rob Long

Expert in Social Psychology, Principal & Trainer at Human Dymensions

Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)

• Podcast – What Jung Can Contribute to Safety – Part One - September 12, 2024
• Relationships as Therapy for Mental Health, A Note for Safety - September 10, 2024
• Cultivating Resilience - September 8, 2024
• No Place for Military Metaphors in Safety - September 6, 2024
• The Influence of C.G. Jung in SPoR - September 5, 2024

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.