voluntary action is the only option left. The decision made by Yoshida and a
number of operators to remain at the plant in order to contain the damage exemplifies the role of autonomous action oriented at preserving safety. The fact that they
were willing to sacrifice their own lives to save others may be considered as an
example of solicitude.
As such, their actions can be deemed ethical and considered as an expression of
“practical reason”, in the meaning developed by Ricoeur. Ricoeur asserts that rationality is only one of the many forms reason can take; another is practical reason.
The main characteristics of Ricoeur’s practical reason are that: it stems from
individual desires, and therefore free will; these desires are “reasonable”, i.e.
understood by others as possible motivators for action, meaning that they are made
explicit to others who can confirm such reasonableness; it is strategic, i.e. it
articulates a means to an end, and leads to the development of complex reasoning,
triggering a dynamic teleology; and finally, it is ethical [10]. The concept seems to
be an appropriate heuristic for the management of extreme situations. It is anchored
in free will, with an explicit connection to ethical aims. Furthermore, the need to
make motives explicit (to ensure reasonableness) encourages reflexive thinking
about motives and action, which increases the relevance of action. It also emphasizes the importance of complex reasoning and its ability to trigger teleological
causation,
2 in a context where it may be crucial to the preservation of safety (cf.
Weick’s theory of enactment [12]).
According to Ricoeur, all human beings have the capacity for practical reason,
while the collective environment may be more or less favorable to its expression.
He calls the most favorable collective environment the “just institution”. However,
as mentioned above, contemporary organizations are built around rational, engineered logic and tools, which estrange people from practical reason and therefore
from voluntary, responsible action. Organizations therefore need to transform if
they are to enable their members to use practical reason.
3.2 “Safe Institutions” for the Management of Extreme
Situations
Managing extreme situations requires people to be able to act voluntarily and
responsibly, both when there is no other option, and in “normal” situations. This
approach strengthens their ability to act appropriately should an extreme situation
arise. Building systems that favor voluntary and responsible action therefore
becomes a matter of both individual and systemic resilience.
2
Teleological causation posits that creating a specific goal contributes to the creation of the
conditions that ensure that it is reached, by “disposing” the individual to reach it. The logic is
similar to that of Weick’s theory of enactment according to which picking up certain cues leads the
situation to develop in a certain way.
190
H. Blazsin
number of operators to remain at the plant in order to contain the damage exemplifies the role of autonomous action oriented at preserving safety. The fact that they
were willing to sacrifice their own lives to save others may be considered as an
example of solicitude.
As such, their actions can be deemed ethical and considered as an expression of
“practical reason”, in the meaning developed by Ricoeur. Ricoeur asserts that rationality is only one of the many forms reason can take; another is practical reason.
The main characteristics of Ricoeur’s practical reason are that: it stems from
individual desires, and therefore free will; these desires are “reasonable”, i.e.
understood by others as possible motivators for action, meaning that they are made
explicit to others who can confirm such reasonableness; it is strategic, i.e. it
articulates a means to an end, and leads to the development of complex reasoning,
triggering a dynamic teleology; and finally, it is ethical [10]. The concept seems to
be an appropriate heuristic for the management of extreme situations. It is anchored
in free will, with an explicit connection to ethical aims. Furthermore, the need to
make motives explicit (to ensure reasonableness) encourages reflexive thinking
about motives and action, which increases the relevance of action. It also emphasizes the importance of complex reasoning and its ability to trigger teleological
causation,
2 in a context where it may be crucial to the preservation of safety (cf.
Weick’s theory of enactment [12]).
According to Ricoeur, all human beings have the capacity for practical reason,
while the collective environment may be more or less favorable to its expression.
He calls the most favorable collective environment the “just institution”. However,
as mentioned above, contemporary organizations are built around rational, engineered logic and tools, which estrange people from practical reason and therefore
from voluntary, responsible action. Organizations therefore need to transform if
they are to enable their members to use practical reason.
3.2 “Safe Institutions” for the Management of Extreme
Situations
Managing extreme situations requires people to be able to act voluntarily and
responsibly, both when there is no other option, and in “normal” situations. This
approach strengthens their ability to act appropriately should an extreme situation
arise. Building systems that favor voluntary and responsible action therefore
becomes a matter of both individual and systemic resilience.
2
Teleological causation posits that creating a specific goal contributes to the creation of the
conditions that ensure that it is reached, by “disposing” the individual to reach it. The logic is
similar to that of Weick’s theory of enactment according to which picking up certain cues leads the
situation to develop in a certain way.
190
H. Blazsin