When we engage with others in an embodied way (kinesthetics) we trigger a host of unseen dynamics that enable greater moral meaning, a higher possibility of ethical practice and a greater likelihood of relational satisfaction.

It matters how we think of others and if we use mechanistic metaphors to explain human ‘being’. It also matters if we use ‘brain-as-computer’ symbols or machine-like symbols for understanding human cognition (https://safetyrisk.net/its-all-in-the-cogs-for-safety/).

The metaphors, symbols and language we use to understand persons operates on the unconscious in a very powerful way and of course, we are not conscious of how this affects us. For example, if you constantly see images of cogs for the brain or use mechanistic metaphors for the nature of thinking, these shape how we relate to others. The images, language and symbols that create distance between us and other help enable indifference and disconnectedness.

In an industry like safety, this makes it much easier to be brutal to others in the name of good – safety.

Any medium that fosters distance between persons, enables a greater chance of dehumanising others, dishonesty and indifference.

• When we make the goal of safety a number it is much easier to be brutal to persons.
• When we make the goal of safety performance, it is much easier to be tough on under-performers.
• When we are caught up in the meaninglessness of slogans and safety ‘noise’. It is so easy to focus on objects not subjects.

Recent research demonstrates that even the use of AI to undertake tasks can make it easier for humans to be more unethical (https://neurosciencenews.com/beahvior-morality-ai-neuroscience-29696/).

This is amplified in an industry that is yet to articulate a professional sense of ethics.

How astounding this industry that loves to sling about its silly slogans and call them ‘principles’ (https://safetyrisk.net/understanding-the-nature-of-performance-and-hop/) and is yet to articulate a mature understanding of ethics!

I read a fascinating commentary about HOP the other day that stated that its ‘fundamentals were not up for debate!’ Mind-blowing! How interesting, HOP has no ‘fundamentals’. You couldn’t make this stuff up.

Then the piece stated that in HOP: ‘systems matter more than individuals’, ‘errors are predictable’ and ‘these truths do not change’. Mind-blowing! Of course, from a source with no expertise in culture, ethics, learning or critical thinking. No wonder none of this goop is up for debate. These statements clearly indicate this person is in a cult. BTW, the company spruiking this stuff was about ‘saving lives’.

This is the kind of arrogance one expects from a collection of slogans searching for a methodology. The piece was written by a mechanical engineer.

The more the language of ‘performance’ drive discourse, the more one distances oneself from persons and human ‘being’. Slogans are the bedrock for propaganda and indoctrination that enables this kind of thinking in this article on HOP.

None of this is about ‘truth’ or ‘principles’. None of this has any ethical foundation. None of this emerges from a methodology that considers persons. It’s all just more marketing dressed up as safety. Moreso, the symbolism and discourse associated with all of this discourse just fosters the same traditional safety that delights in the brutalism of persons anchored to deontological (duty) ethics.

If you are interested in The Ethics of Risk then you can download our latest book for free HERE >>>>> https://www.humandymensions.com/product/the-ethics-of-risk/.

In The Ethics of Risk we discuss the problem with (deontological) ethics that drives safety and propose an ethic to enables professionalism. The book describes a clear methodology, method and positive practical ways to tackle the nature of risk.