The Jungian view of the world can offer a great deal to the world of risk and safety. However, to embrace what Jung can offer, requires considerable unlearning of the dominant worldview of Safety. What Jung can offer Safety is: alternate views of personhood, the nature of energies that drive thinking and behaviour, an holistic understanding of personality, a broader understanding of culture and critical skills in engaging others.

These and more issues were discussed in the first of a two-part podcast by: Aneta Darlington, Chris Langer, Nippin Anand and Rob Long. You can see that video here:

You can also listen on Spotify here: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/socialpsychologyofrisk/episodes/Chat-Regarding-Jung-and-Risk–Safety-Part-1-e2o9pf9

The dominant worldview of Safety that is biased to behaviourism and engineering creates a closed notion of: what it is to be a person, how people learn and how humans make decisions. Jungian thinking (and SPoR thinking) can offer Safety the possibility of greater wisdom and balance in these areas.

The key ideas and thinking of Jung have been discussed previously: https://safetyrisk.net/the-influence-of-c-g-jung-in-spor/; https://safetyrisk.net/the-significance-of-c-g-jung-for-the-social-psychology-of-risk/; https://safetyrisk.net/c-g-jung-on-risk-and-safety/.

However, Jung is only one of many that influence the SPoR Body of Knowledge (https://safetyrisk.net/social-psychology-of-risk-body-of-knowledge/). Other significant thinkers such as Kierkegaard, Ellul, Buber, Merleau-Ponty, Lotman and Ricoeur inform SPoR Methodology and Methods.

This is why SPoR Works (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/it-works-a-new-approach-to-risk-and-safety-book-for-free-download/) in a very different way than Traditional Safety but, has very clear methodology and methods (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/spor-and-semiotics/) that humanise persons ethically in the process of tackling risk.