I think you misunderstand what the author means by simple terms.
Everything can be talked about on different levels of abstraction, including ones which use metaphors or contain inaccuracies in order to create a jumping-off point for further learning.
If you understand something very well, you're able to use various levels of precision + abstraction in order to best communicate it to your audience. You can "play" with it, without getting confused or off-track. If you don't understand it well, this gets very hard.
I think this is true for teaching and mastery in general, and not just for teaching about science or complexity.
Everything can be talked about on different levels of abstraction, including ones which use metaphors or contain inaccuracies in order to create a jumping-off point for further learning.
If you understand something very well, you're able to use various levels of precision + abstraction in order to best communicate it to your audience. You can "play" with it, without getting confused or off-track. If you don't understand it well, this gets very hard.
I think this is true for teaching and mastery in general, and not just for teaching about science or complexity.