Playing it safe in the city increases vulnerability to later disorganization

Evidence

But how does the individual learn to gauge his own abilities without risk? And how does he even develop them without going to new places where he may feel uncomfortable? The answer seems to be that he does not, and this is perhaps one of the greatest ironies of city living. It is possible, of course, as we shall see in the next chapter, simply to stick, to a greater or lesser degree, to the “safe” places. … In doing so, however, one increases one’s vulnerability to disorganization in the face of change. Or, one can take risks, rushing headlong into new places, new people, and new situations, thereby increasing one’s self-knowledge and one’s skills and, in the long run, finding the city not to be risky at all (see Chapter Eight). Most urbanites probably combine the two approaches in learning where to go. Much of their time they stick to the safe places; occasionally they venture forth into those locales they always “heard of but never tried.” — Lyn H. Lofland, World of Strangers_ Order and Action in…, 638

Categorization

• XREF: The irony of risk-aversion breeding fragility directly extends the reader’s thesis about civil inattention weaponizing detachment — the very defense becomes the weakness.
• SEED: Article angle: how cities reward calibrated risk-taking and punish permanent self-protection — the urban analogue of antifragility.