This was just one key question raised at the SPoR Convention in Canberra in September.
One of the problems that the safety industry has to deal with is that, a culture of compliance limits the ability to think critically. Similarly, a fear of negativity (https://safetyrisk.net/for-gods-sake-dont-be-negative-about-safety/ ) limits the ability to engage in deconstruction and reconstruction.
In a similar way, the naïve belief in positive psychology in safety, simply makes Safety blind to what can be learned through criticism. Just because blame is perceived as negative doesn’t mean that ‘blame fixes nothing’.
Similarly, ignorance about semiotics and linguistics in safety leads to some of the most absurd assertions of what safety is about. Eg. believe the impossible (https://safetyrisk.net/believe-the-impossible-and-speak-nonsense-to-people/).
Of course, critical thinking is not part of the safety curriculum. Indeed, the policing of the regulation, counting injury rates and preaching zero vision keeps the industry in a state of ignorance.
If you want to think critically in safety then there cannot be any ‘sacred cows’. Indeed, the lack of critical thinking in safety leads to the most profound religiousity and cultic discourse. Eg. ‘safety saves lives’, ‘all accidents are preventable’, ‘humans are infallible’, ’10 cardinal rules’, ‘in the blink of an eye’ (https://youtu.be/BIhgJ93t0Jw?si=6UOLsxrLSrWNRW4j).
Safety takes on religious discourse because it cannot see its own religious discourse because it doesn’t have the critical tools for self-reflection.
The first thing one learns in any religious studies is how to deconstruct text (hermeneutics). The first thing one learns in legal studies is critical thinking. In order to be professional, one needs to accept critical thinking and all that comes with it.
But, first of all, one needs to be open too and learn the skills of critical thinking including: deconstruction, critical discourse analysis, semiotic analysis, linguistic analysis, ethical analysis, cultural theory and political analysis.
You don’t hear about any of these in safety neither, is any of this part of the safety curriculum. Yet, if you are a lawyer: ethical, political, cultural analysis and deconstruction are your bread and butter. Just have a listen to Greg Smith in the Risk Conversations series and you will hear all this (https://vimeo.com/user/57711103/folder/27018554?fl=tl&fe=sl). This is why a lawyer will hold you accountable in court for the language you use in safety (https://safetyrisk.net/you-will-be-held-accountable-to-the-language-you-use-in-safety/).
Unfortunately, critical thinking is defined in many ways. Some just see it as reasoning and other as just processing data. But in the social sciences it is much more than that.
At the SPoR Convention in Canberra in September as part of the 4 day event on critical thinking the following topics were discussed:
- Critical Thinking Introduction
- The Spectrum of Critical Thinking
- Critical Intelligence and the iThink Method
- Metaphors for Critical thinking
- A Case Study for Critical Thinking, Climate Change
- Hermeneutics and Critical thinking
- Risk Intelligence and 10,000 Hours
- How Do You See the World?
- Critical Thinking as Reflection
- Critical Thinking Models 1 & 2
- Embodied Intelligence and Critical Thinking
- What is Learning? And How to Think Critically
- Learning, Dissonance and the Zone of Proximal Development
- Group Discussion on Gestalt
- Creativity and Thinking Critically
- Language Audit Bingo
- Practical Methods for Critical thinking
In one session Dr Long discussed the SPoR iThink Clock©. The iThink Clock is semiotic method for deconstructing something.
The iThink Clock is based on the basics of deconstruction accepted in Historiography (yet another discipline not discussed in safety). Deconstructing evidence, source, medium of message, symbol and text is foundational to any study of History. The iThink clock method© can be learned and applied to any of the issues you are confronted with in risk and safety. It’s practical and systematic in how it helps you tackle risk. The iThink Clock is just one of the many practical methods SPoR uses to enable people to think critically about risk.
In another session Dr Ashhurst explored his work on Wicked Problems and Collective Coherence as a way of understanding uncertainty and abduction in risk.
Dr Long discussed creativity, intelligence and learning intelligences (Gardner) and their implications for risk.
Andrew Larsen (The Ethics of Risk – https://www.humandymensions.com/product/the-ethics-of-risk/ ) discussed risk perception and the various lenses we use to interpret risk. His Transdisciplinary exercise was particularly thought provoking. And there was much more presented by others.
If any of these interests you or, if you want to learn about critical thinking then you can email Dr Long for access to the program that includes 22 videos, presentations and resources. The cost is $250 and access is gained by emailing admin@spor.com.au
Prof. Robert Long
Latest posts by Prof. Robert Long (see all)
- You Don’t Do AI, AI Does You! Where Next for Safety? - November 14, 2025
- The Myths of Safety Investigations and the Taste of Sausages - November 11, 2025
- Where is Your Energy Focused in Safety? - November 10, 2025
- AI Looks Back, as Does Safety so, Where Will Innovation Come From? - November 9, 2025
- An Introduction to Semiotics and Risk - November 9, 2025
Rob Long says
Thanks Matt. The feedback has been excellent.
Matt Thorne says
The Thursday of the conference was a great day for learning and self reflection. It impacted me personally, as I am sure it did many others.
Great day, thanks Rob and Craig