I added the term "simplexity" to Wikipedia a while back. It was a battle, (it was deleted a couple of times because no one had written an official "book" that mentioned the term -- It was declined for being "proto-language".

There are many different understandings of the term and I have found instances of it as far back as the 1930's (in a book - but that was a different definition than the one that we're thinking about now.) I documented most of the instances I found at the time in Wikipedia.

In a blog posting titled: "Simplexity: Simplicity layered on top of complexity" I proposed a definition from my perspective as a designer who often faces the challenge of designing user interfaces to hide complexity under simple interfaces.

There's another blog posting called: "Simplexity: Simple AND Complex." This posting went further to suggest that there may be a "cycle of simplexity".

In that posting I also proposed the concept: "Conceptual Simplexity" - which poses the idea that simplexity can also be thought of as a problem-solving tool.

Here's a project idea: a forum where design-related neologisms can be proposed. This way we don't have to rely on slow-systems like Wikipedia and mass-media publishers to canonize the new term.

"simplexity" is my new mantra

Sorry man, but the only thing that has any impact in this video is the clever title sequence and some efficient editing. Everything else is toe-curlingly pretentious and nonsensical. The neologisms themselves sound like an attempt to articulate verbally something that should remain in the visual domain.

Ignazcio old pal, you remind me of a senior VP at my old job. She decided that her 'team' wasn't cool enough during a convention trip so she sent someone out to buy black turtlenecks for everyone. Luckily I wasn't part of that team. Hey, maybe there's a neologism there - coolturtlage anyone?

Keep making the videos though. God loves a tryer...

"Simplexity = Emergence"?
Maybe you see a relation between the concepts, but I can see than in "simplexity" there is an special emphasis, so it's indeed encapsulating knowledge, encapsulating a different idea.
If G.H. Lewes wrote about "emergent" that "Every resultant is either a sum or a difference of the co-operant forces..." and if J. Goldstein wrote that emergence is "the arising of novel and coherent structures, patterns and properties during the process of self-organization in complex systems"... that's not the same thing we're talking about here... we're talking about making sure to add a layer of simplicity over a complex system.

There IS a way to describe it, you just lack the ability to do so. That's no insult, just a commentary on what your strengths are.

You may be creative, so much so that you can invent fun new words, but what good is that if they still require a metadescription? How about hiring a writer? You know, someone who's good with words?

Or just have the confidence, as many artist I know, to say, "I can't describe (insert creation here)." Many can't (or won't try to) describe what even inspired them or how the idea began.

It begins to feel more like justifying your existence to faux-intellectual/creatives who then pretend or suppose they understand...