results obtained from its implantation, obtaining quality objectives,
and especially, the definite improvement of the safety of people that live of the sea due
to their occupational relationship.
Principles to consider.
The training requires previous knowledge not only by who imparts it but
also by the contents wanted to be provided in the training. Therefore, objetives should be
well-labeled and the scope and benefit of the formative effort known.
In the basic subjects of nautical sciences and maritime activity, there
seems not to be big differences of criterion in the contents to be exposed, however when
the human factor is handled as the principal source of the maritime activity, as well as
and all the determining factors derived from his action, it is no longer understood with
the same uniformity of criterion, since goodwill seems to subsist above objective rigor.
The knowledge requires the contribution from experience and
investigation, often obtained by the former to a greater extent than by the latter.
Furthermore, the use of technological contributions such as simulation equipment
facilitate the accumulation of experience in the new generations of seafarers who with a
wide and solid academic base, can assimilate the experiences of many professionals and
must incorporate them into the maritime occupational circuit with great possibilities of
success.
However, not always the knowledge acquired by one cause or other
locates the person in front of events, since as a rule, being an excellent professional
lacks the critical and innovative judgement that science provides at great speed outside
the maritime area, being this on tow and subordinated to the initiatives derived from
other industrial activities. It is in these aspects where it is made clear that there is a
need of having an investigating character that permits him to be critical with himself and
with the actions that are developed in his environment.
The mentioned aspects can also come from the experiences of others, but
when they are more advantageous for knowledge is because of the direct personal
implication in the analysis and search of variables that intervened in a fact, incident or
accident and, furthermore, it can be made with the valour of progressing yet at the
expense of recognizing possible mistakes, that are not necessary to be hidden since
afterwards they will be detected afterwards by foreign groups, being its admission or
recognition then more painful.
The immediate questions are, do sailors know how to investigate?, do
they know the procedures and methodologies to achieve a rigorous investigation?, do they
know how to detect what is important among what is superfluous?.
The experience that people provide cannot be considered as the most
extraordinary aspect concerning the guidelines that can be applied in similar cases, since
each situation will be different from the previous one (especially all those related to
fire), since what is valid in one case stops being valid in the following ones when
referring to the nuances and variables that intervened, unless an analysis is made and its
conclusions registered from incidences for its consultation in subsequent cases, in which
case,
