Priorities and goals are a part of GTD. Goals are considered at the 30,000 foot level and are used as a guide in deciding what projects and actions to do. Priorities are considered moment-to-moment in GTD. I agree with you that this isn't a very good way to do it. Maybe for some people sometimes it is, e.g. emergency-room physicians: re-evaluate the priorities after completing each action.
Originally Posted by commmmodo
I suspect that most users of GTD do not usually re-evaluate the priorities of everything on a context/time/energy list whenever they complete an action. People on this forum have talked about using methods such as setting up a list of actions at the beginning of the day, to be done that day without having to re-consider priorities. I like to select actions at the end of the previous workday.
No, not really. One of the things that I and many others like about GTD is the way it de-emphasizes priority, allowing you for example to brush your teeth without having to think "Brushing my teeth is the most important thing I could be doing right now!"; and the way it helps you get lots of somewhat-important things done during bits of time when it wouldn't be practical to get the most important things done right then for one reason or another. With a bit of tweaking, GTD can also help us to spend less time bothering to think about relative priority levels of different actions, as compared to some other systems. (I think.) That is, you don't bother considering the relative priority of things you're not able to do right then anyway for one reason or another. I find it saves mental effort. But, if you take what David Allen says literally and actually re-evaluate the priorities after each action, it could take a lot more mental effort. For me, I found that using (modified) GTD has been very freeing.
Don't we really want GTMITD? Getting THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS done?
Inability is an abstract thing involving comparison with alternate universes; it cannot be experienced.