Zero is Unethical

One of the grand myths projected by the zero vision cult is that there can be no other ethical goal. The supposition is, according to the binary assumption of the core question ‘how many people do you want to harm today’ that zero can be the only ethical answer. If you don’t answer ‘zero’ then you must desire injury and this is unethical. Of course, the assumption of the question hinges on an immature binary logic that is loaded in the question itself. The best response to this dumb question is: ‘why do you ask dumb binary questions’ or ‘I don’t answer dumb questions’.

This assertion that zero can be the only ethical goal is absurd the opposite is the case. The dumb binary question is framed on the assumption that there is only one answer. The truth is zero is the most unethical of goals. A goal that assumes perfection as possible, denies fallibility, asserts perfectionism and anchors to a number can only ever be unethical.

Let’s look at two results from the recent zero survey .

· We see that only 3% denied the statement ‘Human are fallible, Mortal and the world is random’

· And 94% of respondents affirmed that ‘zero causes dishonesty in managing safety’

So, here is the problem. Zero drives unethical and unprofessional behaviour.

If professionalism requires integrity, honesty and transparency then zero makes these impossible. Indeed, zero must hinder the industry from ever becoming professional.

So we now know that this assertion that zero is ethical is completely false. Indeed it creates unethical behaviour and inhibits vision and professionalism.

Zero ideology hinges on the denial of fallibility in contradiction to 97% of the industry and creates denial such as is evidenced in the silence of the AIHS Bok on Ethics (https://safetyrisk.net/the-aihs-bok-and-ethics-check-your-gut/). Here we have in the BoK Chapter on Ethics as some kind of asserted guide to Ethics for the industry and there is no mention of the global mantra of zero (http://visionzero.global/node/6). And all safety associations are signed up to it.

So the XXII World Congress on Safety and Health at Work 2021 (https://ww1.issa.int/world-congress2021) has zero front and centre. How interesting that the global congress in zero continues to promotes this unethical goal. Of course neither can be no vision or thought leadership in zero as the congress asserts. No wonder people are so alienated throughout this industry that tears itself apart via this delusional unethical ideology.

Won’t it be grand to see the AIHS host the 2022 Congress in promoting this unethical mantra whilst at the same time asserting it is professional and ethical.

• 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)

• Critical Theory, Critical Thinking and Safety - July 29, 2021
• Branding, Marketing and The Semiotics of Safety - July 26, 2021
• Making Safety Religious - July 26, 2021
• Psycho-Social and Socio-Psychological, What’s the Difference? - July 21, 2021
• Speak Up, Reporting and Trust in Safety - July 19, 2021

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.