There is a difference between the folks who are trying to understand and those who willfully misunderstand.
There are some folks who are just trying to wrap their heads around all this stuff for the first time and are confused by the conflation of the different merits of:
1) price stability
2) existential stability (or "resilience" if you prefer)
I imagine the first matters a lot more than the second to most.
If by "existential stability" you mean "resilience," then why don't you just say "resilience?"
To most the first matters more, until the second matters at all, and then the second matters a LOT more.
You are right about "most" people. Most people aren't monetary architects and shouldn't be made to think of either of these and ought live their happy lives without such concerns.
The few intrepid folks that find their way to this cranny of the internet are not like most people. Bitcoin folks are also generally smarter and more attractive than "most" people. These people can handle such distinctions and recognize the importance of both.
Going out on the limb that your question isn't rhetorical...I'll make the joke of taking it seriously.
I don't just say resilience because by "existential stability" I mean precisely "existential stability" and not some other thing. Resilience is one of many factors of existential stability and so it is easier for some people to understand and discuss. The parenthetical was to be helpful for that understanding, but they are not generally equivalent terms, just sufficiently exchangeable in this context.
