I understand. That said, when the first team formed around me to develop my work

I understand. That said, when the first team formed around me to develop my work they were adamant that I would never be able to communicate with neurotypicals or normies, and as such that I should expect others to take on that burden (which has happened).
Average people (and below average people) lack the knowledge to comprehend ideas of increasing abstraction and density. Furthermore, terminology varies between disciplines in order to disambiguate differences in phenomena between disciplines.
Because as we have seen, the tendency of simple people to deduce, infer, or guess (or fictionalize) from overly reductive concepts can only be defended against through increases in precision that require … precise language.
Worse, it’s tedious to speak in ‘primitive’ prose rather than ‘sophisticated’ dense prose.
Worse, unless we share the same understanding of terms it’s not clear we understand what one another is saying.
My work in operational prose attempts to improve that clarity by prohibiting many terms, and using a few very precisely defined terms.
But it too is a precise language even if it’s designed to be universal and as such eliminate much of the nonsense prose you’re probably referring to.
God knows I criticize the nonsense prose of marxism and postmodernism on a daily basis. 😉

Reply addressees: @E_TN_OG