Marchiori and Sta. Maria replace the ideal of conceptual stability with the more dynamic capacity of resilience: the ability of a concept to preserve functional adequacy under disturbance. Their distinction between Conceptual Resilience as Immutability and Conceptual Resilience as Adaptability prevents resistance from being equated with rigidity. Some concepts withstand pressure by maintaining their structure; others survive by transforming while conserving a relevant function. The comparative framework treats resilience as scalar, context-dependent and diagnostically plural rather than as a binary property. This matters because technological disruption often changes the practices, entities and relations that concepts coordinate, making simple restoration either impossible or undesirable. The paper’s strongest contribution is anticipatory: conceptual engineering should not merely repair breakdown after it occurs but design concepts capable of absorbing foreseeable tensions. Its bridge to ecology and infrastructure is precise. A resilient concept resembles a living system or adaptable building: continuity is achieved not through immobility but through calibrated transformation, redundancy and responsiveness to changing conditions.
