In energy system analysis, we usually employ models—most often techno-economic, optimising models—to create possible future scenarios. Linked to the models are often qualitative storylines: narratives of plausible socio-economic future pathways that serve as input assumptions for the models. However, despite this approach of integrating social, behavioural and political elements into the models, the ability of present energy system models to measure resilience is limited. We know that in case of complex, uncertain, or even ambiguous problems, we cannot adequately assess, and legitimately decide upon, a system without involving a wider public to answer critical, sometimes ethical questions, such as: can we imagine and agree upon a minimum system functionality or an allocation of resources in case of a blackout? In this paper, a process view on resilience is highlighted that brings together both perspectives—modelling and participative—in an analytic-deliberative approach (National Research Council 1996; Renn 2008). Within a process that complements analytic findings with deliberation, the quality and legitimacy of decisions, as well as the decision-making capacity of a social system would improve. A rough idea of where to implement deliberative elements into an energy resilience monitoring process is addressed.