9 ms·

This seems like a (perhaps deliberate, but I'll assume good faith) misunderstanding of what "safety first" means. It doesn't mean we should prioritise any safet

This seems like a (perhaps deliberate, but I'll assume good faith) misunderstanding of what "safety first" means. It doesn't mean we should prioritise any safety improvement above any other objective. It simply means that before we start on a plan or action we should minimise any safety risk as low as is reasonable. Clearly we can debate what reasonable means, and it will differ for different people, but it isn't an absolutest point or mantra.

iab 6y ago
I admire your good-faith assumption there. Mike Rowe has no equal when it comes to mischaracterizations and straw-man arguments.
jack_riminton 6y ago
Fair. I’ve never heard of him before so I can’t determine whether it is in good faith or not. A better phrase than “safety first” would be “safety always”
gnode 6y ago
> it isn't an absolutest point or mantra. "Safety first" literally is an absolutist mantra; no part of its wording is conditional. Of course people read into it a less absolute figurative meaning that may be useful for thinking about safety. However it can be politically and legally useful to speak using absolutes. Using the example of viruses and the economy, it has been politically expedient for politicians to state that nothing should be done which puts life in danger, while making actions which balance safety and economics.
- jack_riminton 6y ago
  At it's heart I think the phrase is essentially a political one. It signifies at attempt to address the balance between success and safety, rather than skew completely towards success. When I was in the army fellow officers would say their first priority was to get their soldiers home safely, to which the soldiers would joke "can you fly me home tomorrow then Sir?"
- Werewolf255 6y ago
  You're arguing from a place where metaphors don't exist. Aside from people who have already questionable judgement, nobody treats "The customer is always right" as a literal dictum. I am not compelled to "Love that chicken from Popeyes" and I can stop eating Pringles after one.

iab 6y ago

I admire your good-faith assumption there. Mike Rowe has no equal when it comes to mischaracterizations and straw-man arguments.

jack_riminton 6y ago

Fair. I’ve never heard of him before so I can’t determine whether it is in good faith or not. A better phrase than “safety first” would be “safety always”

gnode 6y ago

> it isn't an absolutest point or mantra. "Safety first" literally is an absolutist mantra; no part of its wording is conditional. Of course people read into it a less absolute figurative meaning that may be useful for thinking about safety. However it can be politically and legally useful to speak using absolutes. Using the example of viruses and the economy, it has been politically expedient for politicians to state that nothing should be done which puts life in danger, while making actions which balance safety and economics.

jack_riminton 6y ago
At it's heart I think the phrase is essentially a political one. It signifies at attempt to address the balance between success and safety, rather than skew completely towards success. When I was in the army fellow officers would say their first priority was to get their soldiers home safely, to which the soldiers would joke "can you fly me home tomorrow then Sir?"
Werewolf255 6y ago
You're arguing from a place where metaphors don't exist. Aside from people who have already questionable judgement, nobody treats "The customer is always right" as a literal dictum. I am not compelled to "Love that chicken from Popeyes" and I can stop eating Pringles after one.