Hi, this is Ray.

Last newsletter I wrote about how to build a learning schedule that survives a full-time job. The piece was about structure, consistency, time blocking, defending your sessions. Everything in it was true and worth keeping.

But I'd be doing you a disservice if I left it there, because I have to tell you about one of my best learning years, and it directly contradicts most of what I just wrote. It was 2015. I had no learning plan. No structured schedule. No specific goals. What I had was a lot of curiosity and a willingness to follow it wherever it went. I'd be doing one thing, get interested in something adjacent, spend three weeks deep in that adjacent thing, then notice something even more interesting, follow it, end up somewhere I never planned to go, and learn an enormous amount along the way.

In that year of unstructured exploration, I learned more, retained more, and integrated more than in any of the disciplined years before or after. The learning didn't follow any plan. It followed my curiosity. And the things I learned in that year are still with me, vividly, in a way that almost nothing I've learned from disciplined study has matched.

For a long time I dismissed that year as a fluke… a productive period that happened to coincide with low life demands, not a model I could apply more generally. But the more I've read the cognitive science of how humans actually learn, the more I've come to believe that something specific was happening that year that the structured-learning literature mostly misses. Today's newsletter is about that. The case for spontaneous, curiosity-driven learning, what the science says about why it works so well, and how to make room for it in a life that mostly demands structure. This isn't a rejection of last newsletter. It's the companion piece. Real learning needs both. Let's get into it.

Picture this. A buyer opens ChatGPT and asks for a recommendation in your category. Your competitor's name comes up. Yours doesn't. And that buyer never makes it to your website.

That's happening right now in markets everywhere. And most teams don't know it's happening because it never shows up in their analytics.

HubSpot AEO shows you exactly where your brand stands in AI search, where competitors are getting recommended instead of you, and tells you specifically what to fix. No expertise needed.

Try it free for 28 days. Just $50 a month after.

Let me start with the research, because the case for spontaneous learning rests on something specific that happens in the brain when curiosity drives the exploration.

According to research on curiosity and cognitive performance, research has shown that curious states enhance learning not only for the information we're directly curious about, but also for incidental material encountered at the same time, and these benefits are tied to anticipatory activity in the mesolimbic dopaminergic circuit, including the hippocampus. Read that twice. Curious states improve memory not just for what you're curious about… they improve memory for everything else happening around the same time. The curiosity creates a brain state that's broadly better for encoding new information, not narrowly better for the specific thing that triggered the curiosity.

This is a genuinely important finding. It means that when you're spontaneously exploring something because you're interested, you're learning more efficiently than when you're disciplined-studying something because you should. The mechanism is partly dopamine… the same neurotransmitter I've covered in previous newsletters that drives learning. When curiosity is engaged, the dopamine system is doing the work that disciplined study has to manufacture through willpower and structure. Curiosity-driven learning has the engine already running. Structured learning has to push the engine into motion.

A study of children's learning made this concrete. According to the researchers, children memorized trivia facts better when they were in a high-curious state rather than a low-curious state, and this positive relation may increase with intelligence. The same children. The same facts. Different cognitive states. Different retention. The curiosity wasn't decorative… it was a multiplier on the learning that was happening.

A more recent fMRI study with 5- to 8-year-old children found that high-curiosity was associated with greater activation in inferior frontal gyrus, lateral occipital cortex, the thalamus, and the putamen, with greater learning when children reported more curiosity. The neural activity was visibly different when curiosity was engaged. The learning followed the neural activity. This isn't a feeling we have about preferences. It's a measurable brain-state difference that produces measurable learning differences.

Beyond the curiosity effect, there's something deeper happening when learning is unplanned. Research on what scientists call "curiosity-driven exploration" or "intrinsically motivated learning" has been showing that the way humans naturally explore (when they're allowed to follow their interests) tends to be more cognitively efficient than externally-imposed learning structures.

According to one comprehensive review, intrinsically motivated information-seeking, also called curiosity-driven exploration, is widely believed to be a key ingredient for autonomous learning in the real world. The mechanism is fascinating. When humans choose what to explore based on their own interests, they tend to select tasks of an optimal difficulty level for their current learning state. As one paper found, humans tend to choose activities of intermediate complexity in a range of disparate settings, and the preference for intermediate complexity extends to choices of learning activities. When you follow your spontaneous interest, you naturally gravitate toward material that's at the edge of your competence… not too easy, not too hard, but right in the zone where learning is most efficient.

This is the same "learning zone" I covered in a previous newsletter, but with an important wrinkle. The learning zone is hard to identify deliberately. You have to consciously calibrate difficulty, monitor whether you're making progress, adjust when material is wrong. Curiosity-driven exploration finds the learning zone automatically, because the brain's curiosity system is essentially a learning-zone detector. As the same research noted, setting your own goals seems to increase motivation and let learning blossom in a sweet spot between challenge and frustration. The curiosity is doing the optimization work that you'd otherwise have to do consciously.

This explains my 2015 year. I wasn't deliberately choosing optimal difficulty material. My curiosity was choosing it for me. Each new interest led me to material that was at the edge of what I could handle, which is exactly where learning happens fastest. The lack of structure wasn't a bug… it was what allowed the curiosity-driven calibration to work.

There's another dimension of spontaneous learning that the research has been exploring: the role of unexpected encounters and serendipitous discoveries.

According to research on serendipity in scientific discovery, individual attributes (such as active learning, exploration, and the purpose for engaging in search) can all play a role in influencing serendipity, and some scientists have minds that are more "prepared" to absorb and benefit from serendipitous information than others. The prepared mind primes individuals to recognize the potential value of an unexpected event and helps them make connections and follow up on what they discovered. The concept is "the prepared mind." Some learners are positioned to benefit from chance encounters with information. Others walk past the same information without noticing it.

What positions you for this? Largely, the habit of exploring beyond your immediate goals. The learner who only studies what's on their curriculum encounters very little serendipitous information. The learner who follows tangents, reads widely, explores adjacent interests, talks to people outside their field… this learner constantly stumbles onto unexpected connections. Some of those connections turn out to be the most valuable learning of their entire trajectory.

The history of major discoveries is full of serendipity stories. Penicillin. Velcro. The microwave oven. X-rays. Each of these came from someone in a position to notice something unexpected, recognize its significance, and follow up. The "preparation" wasn't formal training. It was the habit of curious exploration that put them in the way of the discovery and primed them to recognize it when it appeared.

For learners, the implication is real. Pure structured learning, however efficient on its own terms, doesn't position you to encounter the unexpected. Spontaneous exploration does. The serendipitous discoveries you make along the way might end up being more valuable than the planned outcomes you were originally aiming at. But you have to be exploring spontaneously for them to happen.

Now the honest part. The case for spontaneous learning isn't a case against structure. The most effective long-term learners I've known and read about combine both modes. The structured time produces the systematic accumulation of skills and knowledge that no amount of curiosity-driven exploration alone could match. The spontaneous time produces the curiosity-driven encoding, the unexpected connections, and the serendipitous discoveries that pure structure misses.

The dominant pattern that works for most adult learners is something like 70% structured learning and 30% spontaneous exploration. The exact ratio varies, but the principle holds: don't be all structure, and don't be all spontaneity. The combination is what produces the best long-term learning.

Most adult learners have the opposite problem from what they think. They're trying to be more structured because they feel undisciplined. Often what they actually need is more spontaneity, not more structure. The structured time they have isn't producing as much learning as it could because it's missing the curiosity-driven complement. Adding structure to learning that's already over-structured doesn't help. Adding curiosity-driven time to over-structured learning does.

Okay, the practical part. If you've been all-structure and want to bring some spontaneity back, here's what works in practice.

Schedule unscheduled time. This sounds paradoxical, but it works. Block out a few hours per week with no agenda. The block isn't for accomplishing anything specific. It's for following whatever curiosity arises. Reading articles you stumble across. Going down rabbit holes on topics you're interested in. Exploring tangents from your structured learning. The block being on your calendar protects it from being eaten by other obligations. The lack of agenda within the block protects the spontaneity.

Keep a curiosity list. Throughout your week, things will catch your attention… a topic mentioned in conversation, an article you scroll past, a question you wondered about but didn't pursue. Write them down. Don't try to investigate them immediately. Add them to a list. Then, during your unscheduled time, pick whichever item still interests you and follow it. This captures spontaneous curiosity without disrupting your structured work, and gives you ready material when the time comes to explore.

Follow tangents from your structured learning. When you're doing your scheduled work and something interesting catches your attention (a reference to another idea, a name you don't know, a connection you hadn't considered), give yourself permission to chase it for 10-15 minutes before returning to the main work. The structured time accommodates small tangents without losing focus, and those tangents are often where the unexpected learning happens.

Read widely outside your focus area. As I covered in the leisure reading newsletter, reading outside your area of structured learning provides material that your curiosity can use. The person who only reads textbooks in their field has fewer raw inputs for spontaneous exploration than the person who reads novels, history, science journalism, philosophy, biographies… the wider the input, the more material curiosity has to work with.

Have conversations with people who know different things than you do. Some of the best curiosity-driven learning happens through unexpected conversations. When you talk to people whose expertise doesn't overlap with yours, you encounter perspectives and information you wouldn't have generated alone. The conversations themselves are spontaneous learning sessions.

Travel, even small versions of it. Going somewhere new produces spontaneous learning almost as a side effect. You encounter unfamiliar contexts, languages, food, cultural patterns. You can't travel constantly, but even a day trip to an unfamiliar neighborhood produces the kind of novelty that curiosity feeds on.

Don't try to optimize your spontaneous time. The fastest way to kill spontaneous learning is to turn it into another structured project. The block of unscheduled time is supposed to be unscheduled. If you start optimizing it (measuring outputs, setting goals, evaluating efficiency), you've eliminated the very feature that makes it work. Let it be unstructured. Trust the curiosity to do its work.

Some specific patterns that look like spontaneous learning but aren't:

Mindless content consumption. Scrolling YouTube, TikTok, or social media isn't curiosity-driven learning. It's reactive consumption of algorithmically-selected stimulation. The curiosity is being manipulated by external systems, not driven by your own interests. The cognitive benefits don't accumulate the way they do with genuine curiosity-driven exploration.

Constant switching without depth. True curiosity-driven learning involves following an interest deeply enough to actually learn something. Bouncing between topics every 10 minutes without going deep on any of them doesn't produce learning. It produces a feeling of being interested without the substance. The spontaneous learning that works involves following an interest until you've actually learned something about it.

Avoidance disguised as exploration. Sometimes "I'm exploring spontaneously" is what your brain says when it doesn't want to do the harder structured work. Pay attention to this. Genuine curiosity-driven exploration is productive in its own right. Avoidance-driven "exploration" produces nothing while burning time you could have used on either structured work or genuine spontaneous learning.

Here's what I want you to take from this and the previous newsletter together. The dominant cultural advice on learning emphasizes structure… schedules, plans, goals, systems. This advice is mostly correct. Without structure, learning projects don't sustain. Most adult learners need more structure than they have, especially when they're trying to learn while also working.

But structure alone isn't enough. The brain has a curiosity system that's specifically designed to produce efficient learning when allowed to operate. Cutting that system off entirely, in the name of disciplined structured study, reduces the cognitive efficiency of your learning even as it increases the consistency of your effort. The most effective learners use both. Structure for the systematic accumulation. Spontaneity for the curiosity-driven encoding and the serendipitous discoveries that pure structure misses.

If you've been all-structure for a long time and feeling like your learning has become a slog, please consider that the missing ingredient might be spontaneity. The block of unscheduled time, the curiosity list, the willingness to follow tangents, the reading outside your area… these aren't indulgences. They're the cognitive complement that makes structured learning more effective, not less. Adding spontaneity doesn't subtract from your structured time. It often multiplies what your structured time produces.

The year of pure spontaneity I described at the start of this newsletter probably wasn't sustainable as a permanent mode. But it taught me something I'd lost in subsequent more-disciplined years: that curiosity is itself a learning tool, and treating it as a distraction from "real" learning is a mistake. The curiosity IS real learning. Often it's the most efficient kind of learning you have access to.

Make room for it. Schedule the unscheduled time. Keep the curiosity list. Follow the tangents. Read widely. Talk to people outside your field. The structured learning gets better because the spontaneous learning is happening alongside it. The combined effect compounds over years in ways neither mode alone can match.

Even Frodo found things on the road he hadn't planned to find. The journey to Mordor was structured… they had a goal, a direction, a plan. But the discoveries along the way (Tom Bombadil, the elves of Rivendell, the friendship with Boromir, the strider who turned out to be the king) none of these were on the plan. They were what happened when curious people followed a structured journey and remained open to what they encountered. Your learning works the same way. Plan the journey. But stay curious about what you find along the road.

Keep learning (and keep wandering),

Ray