Re:Minimalist Affordances: Making the Right Tradeoffs
by dist-epoch on Wednesday November 08, 2023 @06:08AM
(#38188854)
Maybe the original story is bullshit, but there is something to the concept.
There are countless examples of people preferring something just because it's what they are accustomed with.
Re:Minimalist Affordances: Making the Right Tradeoffs
by 100011_100001 on Wednesday November 08, 2023 @09:10AM
(#38190489)
But that's not Stockholm Syndrome. It's more sunk-cost fallacy and inertia.
Re:Minimalist Affordances: Making the Right Tradeoffs
by dnissley on Wednesday November 08, 2023 @01:15PM
(#38194500)
"better the devil you know than the devil you don't"
Re:Minimalist Affordances: Making the Right Tradeoffs
by mihaic on Wednesday November 08, 2023 @07:26AM
(#38189481)
Thanks, that's much closer to the mentality of many people that are accused of having Stockholm syndrome: they value predictability above something with possibly unexpected results, that might be better or might be worse. The fact that they can't see that this is limiting them to never escape their situation is harder to see.
> According to accounts by Kristin Enmark, one of the hostages, the police were acting incompetently, with little care for the hostages' safety. This forced the hostages to negotiate for their lives and releases with the robbers on their own. In the process, the hostages saw the robbers behaving more rationally than the police negotiators and subsequently developed a deep distrust towards the latter. Enmark had criticized Bejerot specifically for endangering their lives by behaving aggressively and agitating the captors. She had criticized the police for pointing guns at the convicts while the hostages were in the line of fire, and she had told news outlets that one of the captors tried to protect the hostages from being caught in the crossfire. She was also critical of prime minister Olof Palme, as she had negotiated with the captors for freedom, but the prime minister told her that she would have to content herself with dying at her post rather than Palme giving in to the captors' demands. Ultimately, Enmark explained she was more afraid of the police, whose attitude seemed to be a much larger, direct threat to her life than the robbers.
I'm going to repeat this part for emphasis:
> the prime minister told her that she would have to content herself with dying at her post rather than Palme giving in to the captors' demands.
If someone told me I was going to have to become a martyr because it was unacceptable to let someone get away with a bank robbery, I would probably decide I liked the bank robber better, too.