This text examines the role of simplicity in philosophical discourse and its complex relationship with prejudice and preconception. The author argues that simplicity is a double-edged tool that a philosopher must use with clear intent and strategic foresight. It either aligns with existing biases or provokes them, making it a powerful instrument for engaging with an audience's preconceived notions. In contexts where prejudice is deeply ingrained, simplicity acts as a provocation to elicit reactions that can later be subjected to rigorous critical analysis. This method captures attention more effectively than immediate, detailed argumentation, which might otherwise be ignored. Conversely, where biases are less rigid, simplicity allows for the replacement of errors with better, equally accessible concepts. However, the author warns that philosophers must never succumb to the allure of simplicity themselves. Simplicity should be viewed as a strategic pedagogical or rhetorical device rather than a source of final intellectual satisfaction, requiring constant vigilance and a commitment to exploring the underlying complexity behind every simple statement.