Physical exercise boosts your energy levels in so many ways, but in order to conquer that (doorless) castle you need to go through its moat first and experience a deep dip. Even when being fit, every training session is followed by an energy valley. It seems unintuitive: in order to go up, go down first.
That is how most biological organisms grow, by being subjected to harsh conditions. N.N. Taleb coined the term `antifragility' to describe this subtle phenomenon. A fragile system breaks under stress, whereas an antifragile one benefits from it and grows (up to a point). This is an example of the J effect, where an increasing slope is preceded by a temporary decreasing stage.
Extending this inversion game, we could ask whether some systems do the opposite, declining when subjected to growth stimuli. While fragile systems decay under stress, there are systems that respond positively to abundance, relaxation or contentment. We can call them opportunistic. The opposite concept could be called antiopportunism, and defined as the decay response under the presence of nourishing environments.
Do antiopportunistic systems exist? My hypothesis is that they do, and that their existence is what confers the disapproving character to `opportunism', because of the usually negative outcomes of opportunistic behaviour. This would be an example of an inverted J effect, where a temporary increasing improvement is followed by a strong decreasing slope.
The logic under J systems is that real improvement is protected by a moat. The logic under inverted J systems is that an oasis can be a collapse in disguise. In general, the J-logic is based on temporary phenomena hiding their true antiphenomena. A discipline worth learning.