"Let it crash" is a sentence that gets attention. It makes a person want to know more about it, as it sounds controversial and different. "Let it heal" doesn't have that.
A web service returning a 500 error code is a lot more obvious than a 200 with an invalid payload. A crashed app with a stack trace is easier to debug and will cause more user feedback than an app than hangs in a retry loop.
When I had to deal with these things in the Java world, it meant not blindly handling or swallowing exceptions that business code had no business caring about. Does your account management code really think it knows how to properly handle an InterruptedException? Unless your answer is rollback and reset the interrupted flag it’s probably wrong. Can’t write a test for a particular failure scenario? That better blow up loudly with enough context that makes it possible to understand the error condition (and then write a test for it).
A 'crash' in most other language/ecosystem means likely a catastrophic failure of the application, ending in a core dump.
Erlang's error handling is way more nuanced than that blunt phrase indicates.