Some of you may not be familiar with the term "Rubber Duck Debugging". This is a common method for programmers to solve their problem whenever they are stumped; they will simply talk to a rubber duck and explain each line of code until the rubber duck "magically" solves the problem for them despite not being able to talk or listen at all. Practically speaking, it does not have to be exclusively a duck at all - other people use other objects, or even people. Some even use babies whenever they need someone to talk to.
There's a certain kind of power at play when it comes to a person who wishes to explain their problem to another. Whenever we need to elaborate details to a certain situation, we most often realize the solution the moment we begin "dumbing down" these tidbits in order for the audience to understand us. This is because when we are trying to face a problem, we are not as observant in looking for details if we are just thinking inside our heads.
Sometimes, we tend to miss them because we tend to overlook them or underestimate them. When we begin explaining the gist of things to a "dumb" listener, we finally notice these details and manage to evaluate if they have any value to solving the problem.
This is a rather smart and practical tactic for every programmer to save time and effort in order for them to move on to the next goal without the need to take a break to take in details. However, would this same kind of principle potentially work with writers as well?
In all honesty, being a writer is similar to being a programmer. Whenever you are creating a certain sentence or delivering a train of thought in paragraph form, you need to follow some kind of logic, whether it be coming to a conclusion by building proper foundations on a sustainable premise, or even grammar rules.
The literary world uses a convoluted sort of "programming language". Unlike most computer languages, we have more diverse rules that change over time.
Sometimes this method of "debugging" a problem is better for writers because by reading your pieces aloud, you are explaining how your thoughts work and hearing how they would sound to another person. If you are going for a more professional route, this is utterly important in order for you to be deemed credible to write pieces by clients.
The Rubber Duck Debugging method is only one of the more simple and effective ways in order for a writer to be able to solve their problem if they do not have a proofreader or editor to contact immediately.
It is also very helpful because some of these people are only able to follow the thoughts of the piece once it is done. Since writers are the only ones who know what their thoughts are like before they write it down, they can make a proper foundation using this method than to have to explain to another person and possibly lose important details in the process.
If you are a writer, you might want to consider this method. There are so many kinds of methods that can help you properly build your messages, and this is a great way for novices to start, especially when even highly experienced professionals still keep this method at heart.
*Quacks*