engagement, disclosure of scientific information and consent emerged as questions
to be addressed.
Another series of questions concerned the management of evacuees. For
instance, should elderly people be evacuated from the disaster zone? Although they
may suffer from nuclear radiation if they stay, uprooting them from their environment can trigger other effects, such as desocialization and loss of reference
points. This reminds us that major accidents do not only trigger physical damage,
but also psychological and social damage. Furthermore, what should be done if
people are unwilling to be evacuated?
The question of public engagement and preparation is not only an ethical matter
(i.e. maximizing people’s involvement in life-changing decisions). It is also a
matter of social resilience. It is an illustration of how ethics and safety can
strengthen one another. It supports the idea that—far from being a purely abstract
and theoretical perspective—ethics may have very concrete implications, and offer
a practical guide for individual and collective action to manage extreme situations
and preserve safety.
3 Ethics: Not Only a Way Out, but also a Way up
We use the definition of ethics given by the contemporary French philosopher Paul
Ricoeur. According to him, ethics refers to a person’s attempt to lead “a good life,
with and for others, within just institutions” [11]. Therefore it lies at the heart of
human behavior towards oneself as well as others. It offers a guide for both
day-to-day actions and “extreme situations”. In extreme situations everything collapses, from rules to structures to meaning to values, leaving nothing to guide action
but one’s inner conviction that a particular decision is the right one. To act when
faced with this “tragic dimension of action”, where no rule is applicable, calls for a
higher purpose. Ricoeur calls it solicitude towards others. Such solicitude is
expressed through “practical wisdom” [10], which is the result of a process of
“deliberation”, i.e. critical analysis and the comparison of existing rules with the
higher purpose of solicitude.
In the following section, we show how practical reason can help when reflecting
on safety and the management of extreme situations. Based on the testimony of
Masao Yoshida, who was director of the Fukushima Daiichi plant at the time of the
tsunami, we illustrate the role played by individual intention and voluntary action in
the preservation of safety. We then generalize these lessons to show how Ricoeur’s
practical philosophy can provide inspiration for an approach to safety that is different to traditional, engineering approaches; we term this “practical safety”.
188
H. Blazsin
to be addressed.
Another series of questions concerned the management of evacuees. For
instance, should elderly people be evacuated from the disaster zone? Although they
may suffer from nuclear radiation if they stay, uprooting them from their environment can trigger other effects, such as desocialization and loss of reference
points. This reminds us that major accidents do not only trigger physical damage,
but also psychological and social damage. Furthermore, what should be done if
people are unwilling to be evacuated?
The question of public engagement and preparation is not only an ethical matter
(i.e. maximizing people’s involvement in life-changing decisions). It is also a
matter of social resilience. It is an illustration of how ethics and safety can
strengthen one another. It supports the idea that—far from being a purely abstract
and theoretical perspective—ethics may have very concrete implications, and offer
a practical guide for individual and collective action to manage extreme situations
and preserve safety.
3 Ethics: Not Only a Way Out, but also a Way up
We use the definition of ethics given by the contemporary French philosopher Paul
Ricoeur. According to him, ethics refers to a person’s attempt to lead “a good life,
with and for others, within just institutions” [11]. Therefore it lies at the heart of
human behavior towards oneself as well as others. It offers a guide for both
day-to-day actions and “extreme situations”. In extreme situations everything collapses, from rules to structures to meaning to values, leaving nothing to guide action
but one’s inner conviction that a particular decision is the right one. To act when
faced with this “tragic dimension of action”, where no rule is applicable, calls for a
higher purpose. Ricoeur calls it solicitude towards others. Such solicitude is
expressed through “practical wisdom” [10], which is the result of a process of
“deliberation”, i.e. critical analysis and the comparison of existing rules with the
higher purpose of solicitude.
In the following section, we show how practical reason can help when reflecting
on safety and the management of extreme situations. Based on the testimony of
Masao Yoshida, who was director of the Fukushima Daiichi plant at the time of the
tsunami, we illustrate the role played by individual intention and voluntary action in
the preservation of safety. We then generalize these lessons to show how Ricoeur’s
practical philosophy can provide inspiration for an approach to safety that is different to traditional, engineering approaches; we term this “practical safety”.
188
H. Blazsin