How I make a plan that I always follow.

TL;DR

Design plans around brain-relevant signals: make goals feel valuable, time-bound, and emotionally consequential to reduce procrastination.

Briefing Cornell Notes

Briefing

A repeatable planning system hinges on two forces: designing tasks around what the brain treats as valuable and rewarding, and switching between “top-down” structure and “bottom-up” capture as a project evolves. The core claim is that people aren’t naturally built for rigid routines; biological tendencies toward low energy use and habit mean plans must be engineered to feel worthwhile in the moment—otherwise procrastination wins.

The framework starts with a neuroscience lens on motivation and control. The orbital prefrontal cortex is described as the value gate—whether a goal seems worth pursuing and whether an immediate reward follows completion. The bilateral prefrontal cortex is framed as the time-and-planning engine, breaking work into time frames (from days to months) and helping override automatic habits. The amygdala is presented as the emotional pressure system, working alongside the orbital prefrontal cortex to attach fear or consequences to unfinished tasks. Together, these mechanisms explain why a plan that lacks clear outcomes, time boundaries, and emotional salience tends to collapse.

From there, the system becomes practical: define a desirable outcome first, then make the plan actionable enough to trigger movement. A supermarket run becomes the worked example. The outcome is constrained by real-world rules—only one person can leave the compound, and departures are limited to 1–5 p.m.—so the plan must fit a deadline and a purpose: buy food, return by 5 p.m., and comply with lockdown procedures. The planning step is intentionally not perfectionist. Instead, it uses a “top-down” pass that treats the whole trip as a timeline: estimate travel time (including bicycle ride time to a specific supermarket), review past grocery lists for preferences, and run an obstacle-identification exercise to anticipate friction points like QR code checks, ticket returns, and rapid antigen testing after returning.

The method then shifts to “bottom-up” processing once sensory reality takes over. While shopping, random impulses and ideas are treated as raw input rather than distractions. Notes get captured immediately—using a phone app and Logseq—without forcing every thought into the “right” place. Indenting and grouping similar items keeps the emerging list organized without demanding a fully designed system upfront.

App choice follows the same logic. Notion is used when the project has enough known structure to build a top-down system—designing connections, data organization, and a clear architecture. Logseq is used when the project is fuzzy or needs rapid expansion, especially for obstacle journaling and research as problems surface.

The transcript extends the same planning loop to study and content creation. For studying, the outcome is deep conceptual understanding that can be explained to a beginner, supported by learning objectives, calendar and space-repetition checks, curated resources, and a Logseq obstacle journal for hard concepts. For writing videos, the workflow uses Readwise as a highlight manager that syncs sources into Notion, a thought-tracking system with bidirectional linking, and Notion scripting templates. When motivation drops during the exploratory phase—where uncertainty makes progress feel nonproductive—the system reframes the work as creative assembly: turning scattered “atomic” notes into a coherent point, then locking in a thumbnail/title that matches audience expectations. The result is a plan designed to survive both biology and ambiguity, not just good intentions.

Cornell Notes

The planning method is built around brain-driven motivation and two complementary ways of thinking. The orbital prefrontal cortex is treated as the “value” filter, the prefrontal cortex as the time/planning and habit-override system, and the amygdala as the emotional consequence engine. Practically, the process starts by defining a desirable outcome and constraints, then uses top-down planning to create a timeline and anticipate obstacles. During execution, it switches to bottom-up capture—recording sensory-driven ideas and impulses in real time without forcing them into perfect structure. App selection follows the same split: Notion for top-down system design and Logseq for bottom-up expansion, obstacle journaling, and research as gaps appear.

Why does the system insist on defining a “desirable outcome” before planning steps?

The method ties outcomes to motivation circuitry. It frames the orbital prefrontal cortex as deciding whether a goal feels valuable and whether there’s an immediate reward after completion. When the outcome is concrete (e.g., “buy and return by 5 p.m.” during a supermarket trip), the plan becomes easier to initiate because the brain can evaluate value and completion. Without that outcome clarity, the plan lacks the value signal that helps override procrastination.

How does “top-down” planning work in the supermarket example?

Top-down planning treats the trip as a timeline and uses past experience to set structure. It starts by estimating travel time to a specific supermarket by bicycle (including constraints like only being able to scan a QR code and exit the compound). It then checks prior grocery lists in Notion to decide what to buy. Finally, it runs an obstacle-identification exercise—anticipating QR code checks, ticket returns, and the rapid antigen test needed after returning—so the plan accounts for predictable friction.

What does “bottom-up” processing change once shopping begins?

Bottom-up processing shifts attention to sensory input and real-time adjustments. Instead of forcing every idea into a perfect category, it captures random thoughts and impulses immediately (using Logseq/phone notes) and groups similar items later by indenting. The emphasis is on flexibility: if something feels tempting or useful in the moment, it gets recorded, not rejected for being messy.

How do app choices reflect the top-down vs bottom-up split?

Notion is used when the project has enough known structure for top-down design—building a system, mapping connections, and organizing data. Logseq is used when the project is unclear or needs iterative growth—filling gaps through obstacle journaling, research, and rapid note expansion. The guiding rule is to match the tool to the phase: structure-first when possible, capture-and-expand when uncertainty dominates.

What’s the study-session planning outcome, and how is it operationalized?

The outcome is deep conceptual understanding of a chapter or topic to the point of explaining it to a beginner. Operational steps include reviewing learning objectives from syllabus materials, checking the school calendar and space-repetition schedule, collecting learning resources from the internet from multiple angles (to avoid single-frame misunderstanding), and forecasting hard concepts using Logseq obstacle journaling. A checklist template (“study”) is then used to ensure nothing is missed, with date stamps and optional tags like “dental school.”

How does the workflow handle creative uncertainty during video scripting?

The method separates exploratory creativity from execution. During exploration, rewards are unclear and progress can feel nonproductive, so it reframes the task as assembling “atomic” notes into a coherent point. It also uses a structured sequence: start a Notion template for the video idea, write a one-sentence summary, mine unprocessed highlights/notes from Logseq, then generate thumbnail/title from the audience’s perspective. Only after that does it write and adjust the script, aiming to minimize editing time.

Review Questions

How do the orbital prefrontal cortex, prefrontal cortex, and amygdala each map to a step in the planning workflow?
In the supermarket example, what specific constraints drive the top-down plan, and what kinds of inputs are deferred to bottom-up capture?
What criteria determine whether Notion or Logseq is used for a given project phase?

Key Points

1
Design plans around brain-relevant signals: make goals feel valuable, time-bound, and emotionally consequential to reduce procrastination.
2
Start with a desirable outcome and real constraints before building steps; deadlines and purpose create the “value” signal.
3
Use top-down planning to create a timeline, estimate durations, and anticipate obstacles through thought experiments.
4
Switch to bottom-up capture during execution to record sensory-driven ideas and impulses without forcing perfect organization immediately.
5
Match tools to thinking mode: use Notion for top-down system design and Logseq for bottom-up expansion, obstacle journaling, and research.
6
Apply the same outcome-first, obstacle-aware planning loop to studying (objectives, resources, space repetition) and content creation (idea templates, audience-aligned thumbnail/title, scripting).
7
Treat exploratory creativity as a separate phase from execution and reframe it as assembling scattered notes into a coherent message.

Highlights

Motivation is framed as a value-and-consequence system: orbital prefrontal cortex evaluates worth, prefrontal regions plan time and override habits, and the amygdala adds emotional pressure.

The supermarket plan works because it’s constraint-driven (exit window, QR checks, post-return testing) and obstacle-aware rather than perfectionist.

Top-down and bottom-up aren’t competing styles—they’re sequential phases: structure first, then flexible capture and real-time adjustment.

App selection follows cognition: Notion for designed structure, Logseq for iterative growth when uncertainty creates gaps.

Creative work becomes manageable by reframing exploratory uncertainty as “assembling atomic information” before locking in marketing-facing choices like thumbnail and title.

Topics

Routine Planning
Neuroscience Motivation
Top-Down vs Bottom-Up
Note-Taking Systems
Study and Content Workflows