By Warren Whitley
In the academic world, praxis is the term that describes how theory is put into practice. This concept has important connotations for the fire service. As the US fire service, in general, moves along the continuum from trade to profession, praxis is a key to that continued movement.
The main point to understanding praxis in the fire service is this – firefighters have to understand the ‘why’ of ‘what’ they do. Carrying out tasks, such as vertical ventilation, because it has always been done that way, leaves out the ‘why’ the task needs to be done. Coupled with that, is the question, “Was the task appropriate for the conditions present?” Did the action make the fire grow or decay? Does the firefighter understand the ramifications of the action and a less than desired outcome if it is performed improperly or at the wrong time?
When we look at jobs that are considered professions, such as lawyers, doctors, dentists, college professors, etc, one of the common elements of being a professional is being considered an expert in whatever field they are practicing. If we consider the important fire fighting aspect of fire behavior, the level of knowledge that the average American fire fighter has is abysmal. Training standards give almost no time to science, but a lot of time to slogans. “Big fire, big water”, “Put the wet stuff on the red stuff”, etc. Then there are the endless debates on nozzle selection; gallons per minute or even gallons per second. Ventilate to get ‘lift’. None of these address some key issues. Are they based in science? Do they cause the fire to grow or decay? Are they effective and efficient? If they work, why do they work? Are the fire fighters exposed to thermal insult while engaged in a particular extinguishment theory? If so, why is that an accepted practice?
When I read fire fighter death and injury reports, quite often I see situations that were preventable with good fire behavior knowledge and risk assessment. I am not against aggressive interior operations, but to move in under an active flow path without mitigating that issue is a dangerous gamble. You are betting lives that you can knock down the fire before the fire fighter induced, hot, rich flashover occurs. If you know how to control the air, use a TIC to guide you through darkened conditions and apply water effectively to cool gases, surfaces, and your environment, then good practices can improve safety and efficiency. I do not support aggressive interior operations that are conducted simply because that is the department’s standard practice regardless of the conditions presented. Same with opening up a roof regardless of the conditions or the location of the fire. These examples do not involve thinking or knowledge, just a blind allegiance to a SOP or a particular vision of ‘firefighting’.
Ladies and gentlemen, wake up! The fire environment has changed and it can kill you quickly or slowly. You can underestimate the hazards of a heat release rate that is far greater than it was 30 years ago and get burned, or you can die from cancer you developed from years of exposure to carcinogens contained in the by-products of incomplete combustion. And most of that exposure comes from contaminated gear that was too cool looking to wash. So, it is your choice. Get your head in the game and continue to learn all you can about fire fighting, especially the science of the ‘why’. Knowing the why can help you select the best how and when to mitigate the problem at the least risk to you. Praxis – it is not just a fifty-cent word, it is how professionals become professionals.