The basis of this discussion depends on how ‘error’ is defined; and thence problems of definition which include limiting thoughts and situations, and considering circumstantial factors.
Some areas of aviation safety have attempted to break out of these constraints – ‘Error is a meaningless concept’ - an introduction to a NATO conference on error (
looking for link).
Similar issues are identified in:-
‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’
‘The Reinvention of Human Error’.
‘Perspectives on Human Error: Hindsight Biases and Local Rationality’
A more valuable approach for safety is to consider how circumstantial factors and the environment affected the individuals – variable human (crew) performance. This could be used to generate a better understanding of the overall situation (from which to learn) than that achieved achieved by ‘carpeting’ an individual; unfortunately the military is more biased to blame – structural hierarchy, and that 'blame' is for more satisfying both for individuals and those ranking above.
“
Responsibility lies with those who could act but do not, it lies with those who could learn but do not and for those who evaluate it can add to their capacity to make interventions which might make all our lives the safer”. P. Capper, Cave Creek Commissions of Inquiry.