Asking the Wrong Questions to Get the Anticipated Reply in Security
If you outline security by harm charges the query requested is: ‘How many people do you want injured today?’ When security is outlined by zero, the identical and comparable questions emerge. The traditional advert carried out by NSW Transport (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ra5LK8x86zU ) is an instance of this unethical, manipulated questioning.
That is how a improper assumption drives improper (unethical) questioning.
Security isn’t outlined by the absence or presence of harm. Simply because nobody is being harmed doesn’t imply the office is secure. Sadly, this definition/assumption of security as hurt, drives questions constructed on binary opposition (https://vimeo.com/172195306 ). Binary opposition drives unethical questioning.
The questioning that emerges from binary opposition is unethical, it seeks entrapment by way of both/or questions. Both/or questioning is loaded, reminiscent of is the query at the begin of this weblog. Such questioning is manipulative and makes no allowance for a non-numerical reply or doubt. Such a query doesn’t permit for every other reply than zero.
The easiest way to deal with loaded unethical questions, is to query the query. Why are you asking me this? What’s your agenda? Why are you asking such a manipulative query? Why is your query in search of a numerical reply? Why have you ever chosen to make numerics form your query? Why do you ask questions that intimidate and search to govern me? Maybe ask them a binary query again: ‘How long have you been asking unethical questions?’ to make your level. When anybody asks you a manipulative unethical query, don’t reply it.
I take a look at this vile unethical advert from NSW Transport and consider different dumb loaded unethical questions like, ‘when did you stop beating your wife?’
Watch this advert and see how the query humiliates the actor. See the way it manipulates the individual and seeks to hurt this man psychologically? That is how security makes use of the finish to justify the means. As a result of my god is Zero, I can query how I like!
Wrong questions are unethical questions that say way more about the questioner than the individual being questioned. Unethical questions don’t give energy to the different however declare energy over others in the mode of the query. After all, with out an ethic of danger in the security business however a deontological micky mouse tirade (https://safetyrisk.net/the-aihs-bok-and-ethics-check-your-gut/ ), why would any security curriculum examine the moral nature of questioning? (https://safetyrisk.net/conforming-and-questioning-in-safety/ ). So long as the reply is zero, it doesn’t matter what query is requested, proper? Wrong!
Questions that carry energy to the self and disempower others are unethical questions and by no means search an sincere reply. Such questions don’t even permit dialog or reflective listening. Such questions solely search the response the query desires to listen to, such questions don’t have anything to do with listening, empowering others, dialog or security. How vile and disgusting is that this. I’m not your object Zero to play with.
As soon as Security accepts the ideology of Zero, the two mix on an unethical campaign. Then when this two-legged race will get happening an investigation it continues to ask improper unethical questions in search of the reply it already is aware of. Doesn’t take lengthy until it journeys over.
This method to questioning is frequent in all the dominant incident investigation strategies in security, and it’s sickening. Please title for me one incident investigation bundle on the market that discusses the ethics of questioning or ethics as part of investigation methodology, hmmm I assumed so. How skilled.
Binary Opposition and the Logic of Safety from Human Dymensions on Vimeo.