Cliche: Lacking power to evoke interest through overuse or repetition; hackneyed. 2.
Archaic Frayed or worn out by use.
hmmmmmm
Cliche: Lacking power to evoke interest through overuse or repetition; hackneyed. 2.
Archaic Frayed or worn out by use.
hmmmmmm
I understand Friedrich Nietzsche wrote “Is not life a hundred times to short for us to bore ourselves?” immediately after he had encountered the FRA Forum for the first time.
yep can't agree moreOriginally Posted by Dynamo Dan
Nietzsche would have approved of this thread. Perspectivism demanded continuous reassessment of dogmatic rules. I suspect he would have found more incomprehensible the apparent need of some to interfere in a subject they have no interest in guided by neither by forcing of will nor the utilitarian motives he despised.
This is a thread about rules, not philosophy, other than the safety philosophy as enshrined post 1974 which is not to mandate but to demand the responsible person (RO) does an assessment of safety related specifically to the task, the experience of those undertaking it, needs for instruction and supervision to manage the safety. Guidance notes are there to guide. The specific assessment is key. The factory acts were removed precisely BECAUSE one size fits all rules and mandates were demonstrably a bad way to manage safety. So why is FRA ignoring that?
Maybe you should have asked Hume..
Nietzsche would have approved of this thread. Perspectivism demanded continuous reassessment of dogmatic rules. I suspect he would have found more incomprehensible the apparent need of some to interfere in a subject they have no interest in guided by neither by forcing of will nor the utilitarian motives he despised.
This is a thread about rules, not philosophy, other than the safety philosophy as enshrined post 1974 legilslation, which deliberately does not mandate but demands instate the responsible person (RO) does an assessment of safety related specifically to the task, the experience of those undertaking it, needs for instruction and supervision to manage the safety. Guidance notes are there to guide. The specific assessment is key. The factory acts were removed precisely BECAUSE one size fits all rules and mandates were demonstrably a bad way to manage safety. So why is FRA ignoring that history?
Now that's looking a couple of days in to the future AI
We're only at Post 1225 yet
Wasn't it Nietzsche who said "Only the mad post on the FRA Forum and those that read there then go mad"?
Before he went mad.
He was mad, (IMHO Barking) but what has that got to do with it?
Joan of arc
Are you a runner, RO, or both???
Last edited by wynn; 04-11-2013 at 01:20 PM.
Posting Permissions
