Belief is rarely a presentation of propositions but is mostly hidden in symbolic enactments, rituals, myths, customs, cultural norms, semiotics and semiosis in acts.

There is no such thing as a non-belief, even atheism is a belief. There is no neutrality or objectivity in belief, despite what the AIHS Code of Ethics states. All belief has a source, a bias, an ethic and comes from a worldview/methodology/philosophy. Moreso, every semiotic is interpreted through a hermeneutic (theory of interpretation) that is coloured by safety beliefs.

All the images, graphics, symbols, memes and images safety use, disguise and hide an underlying ethic of belief. Most often these are not declared or made transparent, which is of course unethical.

For example, the Heinrich pyramid is founded on the assumption of a hierarchy of injury representation and Heinrich dominoes on linearity (https://safetyrisk.net/heinrichs-alternate-reality/). Both semiotics assume a certain mechanical reality and constructed mode of truth that is neither historical or evidential. This is how semiotics work. All mythology is empowered by semiotics and semiotic power is the key to understanding mythology. Although Heinrich claims the word ‘science’, there is nothing scientific in any of Heinrich’s semiotics (https://safetyrisk.net/the-non-science-of-heinrich/).

Similarly, the Bradley Curve has no basis in evidence but is founded on zero mythology, DuPont ideology (https://safetyrisk.net/the-false-claims-of-the-bradley-curve/), myths of perfection (https://safetyrisk.net/the-dangerous-and-harmful-bradley-curve/), linearity and Cartesian disembodiment.

The Swiss-cheese by Reason is perhaps one of the greatest liabilities invested in safety in the past fifty years. The swiss-cheese is founded on linearity, naïve causality, deontological philosophy and simplistic naïve understandings of being. Rather than James Reason being a pioneer of safety, this legacy is one of the greatest burdens to leave on an industry that is yet to think critically about risk. The same could be said about Hollnagel’s binary concoction of S1/S2 and FRAM or the slogans and brain-centrism of HOP.

Look at all of safety semiotics and ask, where is it silent? What is taboo? What is never spoken about? What is never represented? (https://safetyrisk.net/safety-culture-silences/ )

Many of these safety semiotics have been analysed and deconstructed in our book on Investigations: https://www.humandymensions.com/product/seek-investigations-a-semiotic-method/ and Ethics: https://www.humandymensions.com/product/the-ethics-of-risk/

Beliefs don’t have to be propositional eg. a swastika clearly represents racism, a cross Christianity, an Om Hinduism or the image of a brain Rationalism.

So, when you look at the dominant images, graphics and semiotics of safety, what does it believe?

If you want to study more about safety beliefs you can sign up for the free workshops to be held in July: admin@spor.com.au