The first draft of any piece of writing, 99% of the time, is NOT GOOD.

Full stop.

From jumbled logic to false conclusions—you need to take a hard look at your writing and get rid of the nonsense.

But…how? Today is another moment I’m going to tie a piece of Philosophy into the writing process.

The cure for crappy first drafts lies in an ancient but powerful technique: The Socratic method.

Your First Draft is a Brain Dump

First drafts tend to be a bit chaotic because writing is, at its core, a process of discovery.

When you first put those initial words on the page, you’re essentially thinking out loud—trying to make sense of a topic, find connections, and articulate ideas that may not yet be fully formed.

I call this building a “dump doc.”​

This exploratory phase is crucial, but it also leads to common writing pitfalls, including:

1. Generalizations – Broad statements like “People always fear change” or “Technology is making society worse” pop up because our brains prefer easy shortcuts when forming ideas.
2. Unfounded Claims – Early drafts often contain statements that feel true but lack evidence, like “Most businesses fail within the first year.” (Spoiler: They don’t—about 20% fail in the first year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.)
3. False Dichotomies – First drafts love extremes: “Either you work hard, or you fail.” The reality, of course, is more nuanced.
4. Circular Reasoning – Writers sometimes accidentally assume what they’re trying to prove: “Freedom of speech is important because people should be free to express themselves.”

Enter Socrates

The Socratic method, a form of disciplined questioning used to uncover assumptions and refine arguments, can help writers identify and fix these weaknesses. It’s also something most journalists do well; the name of the game here is being curious and challenging premises.

Here’s how The Socratic Method works:

• Understand the belief: See if your writing clearly states its thesis.
• Reflect: Summarize the thesis and clarify your understanding in simple language.
• Gather evidence: See if you’ve provided solid evidence for the thesis with data, analysis, and facts.
• Challenge assumptions: Question the thesis’s assumptions by asking questions like “why?” and “how?” as you read.
• Repeat: Repeat the process if needed.

Another version of this is the "Feynman Technique," named after famous physicist Richard Feynman.

Let’s go deeper on each of these steps so you can look at your first draft with clear eyes (and full hearts? Can’t lose??)

1. Question Your Generalizations

A generalization is taking one or a few facts and making a broader, more universal statement. For example, if all the girls you know play with dolls, you might make the generalization that all girls play with dolls. When you find a sweeping statement in your draft, challenge it and ask:

• Is this always true?
• Can I think of counterexamples?
• What evidence supports this?

For example, instead of saying, “Social media is ruining communication,” you might revise to: “While social media has changed communication styles, research suggests it has both positive and negative effects, depending on how it’s used.”

2. Interrogate Your Claims

When you’re self-editing, anytime you make a claim, ask:

• How do I know this?
• What sources or data support this?
• Would an informed reader agree with this, or would they demand proof?

If you write, “Reading fiction improves empathy,” you might pause and ask, “What studies back this up?” (Turns out, there are some. A 2013 study in Science found that literary fiction readers performed better on empathy tests.)

3. Identify False Dichotomies

Binary thinking makes for compelling soundbites but weak arguments. They lack nuance. When you see an “either/or” statement, ask:

• Are these really the only two options?
• Is there a middle ground? (Reader, this is the *one* question I am asking in all areas of my life right now. The answer for everything lives in the middle of two extremes.)

Instead of “You either support free speech or censorship or don’t,” a stronger revision might be: “While free speech is a fundamental right, societies often debate its limits, especially when it comes to hate speech or misinformation.”

4. Spot Circular Reasoning

Circular reasoning is a logical fallacy in which an argument attempts to prove its conclusion by using the conclusion itself as evidence. It essentially states, "This is true because it's true," without providing any real supporting evidence, effectively going in a circle without reaching a valid conclusion.

If you find a sentence that feels redundant in your draft, try asking:

• Am I defining a concept by itself?
• Can I rephrase this in a way that introduces new information?

For example, “Democracy is the best form of government because it allows democratic participation” could become “Democracy is widely valued because it enables citizens to influence laws and policies through voting and representation.”

Let Socrates Be Your Editorial Guide

First drafts are messy because writing is thinking in real-time.

But by applying the Socratic method—questioning assumptions, challenging claims, and considering alternative perspectives—you can transform a weak draft into a strong, well-reasoned piece.

Next time you self-edit, channel your inner Socrates and ask: Is this really true? How do I know? What am I assuming?

Your writing (and your readers) will thank you.

'Til next time,