The Doctrine of Atonement for Safety People
I was sent this one from a safety conference this week and just couldn’t pass up a comment on its absurdity.
First of all Safety saves no-one and the language of salvation belongs elsewhere not at a safety conference (and people wonder why I present Safety as a religious faith). If I make something or process safer, I don’t ‘save’ anyone. The statement presumes that people would ‘perish’ if not for Safety, hmmm the wages of sin embodies in the Bradley Curve comes to mind (https://safetyrisk.net/safety-curves-and-pyramids/ ).
Still, the SIA and global Safety has set the model for believing (https://safetyrisk.net/no-evidence-for-the-religion-of-zero/) driven by the ideology of the absolute god – zero.
Any examination of the language on this ‘Safety Saves’ note indicates:
- The endorsement of Safety as an archetype.
- A set up for arrogance in Safety as a modus operandi.
- The presumption of us and them, the lost and saved.
A naïve approach to the work of safety.
A theology of atonement for sins (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonement). Of course, the theology of atonement is a theological construct (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/fallibility-risk-living-uncertainty/)
The delusion that dumb thinking makes one a ‘professional’.
The idea that prevention is equated to ‘salvation’.
The attribution of salvation to a group of people.
The attribution of salvation to preventative acts.
A theology of the cross in symbology.
The more Safety thinks and talks like this, the more removed it will become from the very people it wishes to ‘serve’. ‘Us and them’ language has no place in safety. The language of ‘service’ makes much more sense than the language of ‘salvation’ for a secular activity. The trouble is, in the profound mis-education of safety people (https://safetyrisk.net/isnt-it-time-we-reformed-the-whs-curriculum/) where dumb down wins the door prize, this kind of thinking is a logical trajectory.
All we have to do now is add letters after our name based on an exam in numerics and regulation to become ‘professionals’. Professionals in salvation, sounds like a priesthood to me (http://www.safetydifferently.com/?s=Priesthood).
Through this language Safety now represents itself as a class of people that ‘saves’ people from themselves, the Bradley Curve’s ‘heresy’ and ‘natural instincts’ come to mind.
I don’t know just how more sad Safety can get.