Conserve your best thinking for emergency use only? (Something about that seems wrong, even though the systematic logic of leaving a tolerance for error is sound.)
No, no. Conserve cleverness for emergencies. Logical consistency is the best policy: most of the time, you should trudge along, applying existing solutions (2 wheel drive). The only time you should be clever and try to do something innovative is when your traditional models fail you. (4 wheel drive).
On the other hand, this style of thinking has some risk of demotivation. It collapses varied results into a static judgment prone to a 'fixed mindset': no matter the inputs of intellect/talent/effort, the end result is you hit a limit. So smile at the insight but remember which limit you hit still matters. The deeper snow is more fun.
In the real world, I suppose, that means not doing anything clever, except to backpedal and fix a problem.