This is not a programming subreddit, but I assume you're familiar with the subject.

The job of a book author and advice merchant is to convey their advice in a manner that people can follow. People who are bad at this shouldn't be selling the advice. In this case, the problem isn't the writing style, it's just that there's nothing behind it.

Have you seen how "principled" this principle is? The author struggles to come up with the description himself. In his videos he says stuff like "Single responsibility principle is actually not about single responsibility, it's about a single reason for change" (I guess he did change his blog to say it's both now). This is the vaguest shit possible. Basically, Martin is a boomer consultant, who makes up acronyms to sell his shit. He needed some rules to make a nice acronym, so he picked 5 things arbitrarily, one of these happened to be "make stuff simple, not complicated". This is clearly meaningless padding, so he needed to convert this rule to be something that people will think is insightful - he came up with "single responsibility" which is the same non-advice, just with more plausible deniability.

I'm tired of having to write the same shit over and over again whenever another person get's caught up in this and posts on the programming subreddits about it so here's my latest brief description: https://old.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/xvu3gc/solid_principles_sketches/ir3uhyx/

No, there's just no insight in the principle whatshowever (see my other comment in this thread). This is engineering, not bible studies, if you need to repeat the wording exactly for it to sound convincing, there's probably an issue with the advice.