Can you have too much resilience? It seems to depend on how you define your system.
To have energy resilience, in the form of calories available for your body, you need more calories available to you than you use. That is the definition of resilience–the ability to continue to function when the environment changes. You need to have enough calories available to burn in activities, given whatever activities that changes in the environment will require of you. You can store those available calories inside or outside your body. Inside your body, calories are basically stored as body fat. To be more inside-body calorie-resilient, you need more body fat. And, too much body fat, when you are out of calorie-balance, impedes proper body functions and leads to many diseases. You can also store calories outside your body, in access to food. To be more outside-body calorie-resilient, you need more access to food. Since food goes bad quickly, you need access to continuously-replenishable food sources. We do this by spending more time on getting food, having more people work on getting food, or by having more preserved food available. It takes energy, the burning of calories, to increase calorie-resilience, whether we store the energy inside or outside our bodies. And this increased use of calorie-energy for accessing the calories leads to the requirement for even more access to calories.
To have energy resilience, in the form of creativity available to do work, you need more human creative energy available to you than you use. I am currently working on a model of human creative energy, which I call Homo lumens, where humans are beings of light energy, which comes straight from physics. One challenge with energy resilience in human creativity is that the creative energy seems to dissipate very quickly. We seem to have a creative moment, whether thinking of new possibilities, answering a question, or seeing how to apply a screwdriver to a screw. They all take an instant of human creativity, of lumens. To be resilient, we need to have enough lumens being generated to use in all of the required applications. If this creative energy dissipates quickly, then essentially all of the lumens energy generated goes either into a specific activity or it is dissipated, used in some other way. Following this logic, having more creative energy generated than is engaged in specific activities leads to more creative energy being dissipated. This is inefficient. Putting more energy into the system with the same output is less efficient, a waste of creative energy. This probably leads to burnout, to people being disengaged or otherwise-engaged.
Energy resilience, whether in calories or lumens, seems to lead to a question of resilience versus efficiency. Since both calories and lumens dissipate relatively quickly, we need to have constant access to them. The activity of accessing them requires even more access to energy sources. Having access to more than we need becomes inefficient. We spend energy accessing energy that will dissipate before we can use it–wasted food, wasted creativity. Not very smart. Not having access to enough leads to low resilience, the inability to continue to function when the environment changes. Not very smart either. This suggests that to be smart, we have to figure out how to increase our access to energy, whether calories or lumens, without increasing the energy used to access it or losing lots of energy to dissipation. One way to do that is by increasing the ability to access and tangibilize the potential energy available, without expending much more energy. Until we need the energy, it remains in its potential form. When we need it, we tangibilize it. I explore how to do this, through our agreements fields, in a previous post.