Danger
Derrida at work
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11937951 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jim Armstrong (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2003 |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 83-94 |
| Publication date | 2003-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Interdisciplinary Science Reviews (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0308-0188 • E-ISSN: 1743-2790 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1179/030801803225005166 |
| OpenAlex | W2008649727 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 12 |
The term ‘safety critical’ applies to a wide range of technologies, from car braking systems, through trains and their signalling systems, to advanced air and space technology, both civil and military. It is a rather sophisticated euphemism for ‘dangerous';and like the word ‘safe’, it suggests the existence of some spectral but inherent property beneficial to human health that could be lost under certain conditions, but does not have to be. How far can the discourse about safety be trusted?And why are debates about risk sometimes so heated?In this paper it is proposed that literary theory, particularly work on ‘deconstruction’ by philosopher Jacques Derrida, can shed some light on these questions. Unsurprisingly, deconstruction cannot say much to safety engineers about the technicalities of system building. But then again questions about whether and why we continue to build and rely upon safety critical technologies are not simply technical; the language used in them is almost always politically charged
Work (physics · Engineering · Language, Metaphor, and Cognition · Mechanical Engineering
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |