Talk:Intuition (philosophy)

message: This page really needs work to make it coherent.  I've written a bit on the role of intuition in analytic philosophy, but the rest of the article is a collection of seemingly random facts.  I could remove some of the more suspect claims, but it would be nice if someone who knew the role of intuition in non-analytic philosophy could write that section (I'm not really competent to do that).--JustinBlank (talk) 13:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cohesiveness

message: I agree. I'm not learned enough in this area to add or revise anything as far as content, but I'll do my best to make some of the text more intelligible. DrBrunson (talk) 07:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean-up

message: This page could do with much better structuring. I don't know anything about the role of intuition in non-analytic philosophy but I think more distinctions need to be made about its role within different areas of analytic philosophy. Perhaps different sections for epistemology, logic, ethics, others perhaps?. Also the opening sentence seems dubious and clumsy. Not all philosophers would characterize intuition as a perception, perhaps the word 'immediate' would be better? Also the debate about the validity of intuitions turns to a large extent on whether or not they are justified a priori, so perhaps these should both be discussed. Unfortunately I have yet to learn how to edit on Wikipedia, or I would make these changes.
: I went ahead and removed the first sentence, which was lingering on the page out of misplaced deference to its pair of references.  As for editing, just jump in and start adding stuff--this page is in bad enough shape that you don't need to use kid gloves.  JustinBlank (talk) 03:51, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: General Organization and content

message: The following is my explanation of what I see and not a proof. If you can use any of it, of course feel free.
We push many automated processes into the subconscious and they may not be readily available. We push ideas there too, and sometimes can't remember them. Intuitions are ideas or thoughts. We wouldn't say that thoughts are ESP, though. Thoughts come to us all day long. I suppose one simple definition of an intuition is a thought we hadn't had before. Sometimes they seem reasonable and sometimes not. From what I can tell, Einstein was referring to those thoughts that don't seem reasonable when he said. "If an idea doesn't seem wrong at first, there is no hope for it." Similar is the what thoughts I define as intuitions. When I am planning to say something, and the thought comes to me, "Should I say that", invariably I shouldn't, even if I can't see why not. I would imagine that experience trains the mind to recognize that, for instance, when the body temperature gets low, we may catch a cold. Or you see a pattern in a lot of data, that non intuitives are missing. 
Again, from my reading I find that we have a non verbal logic and vision logic, which is an unconscious processing. When a thought comes that we consider an intuition, we can than evaluated it. Then it can stand on it's own or fall. Likewise emotions have a thought or thoughts that go with them. We can get to the thought to see what it is telling us or correct it, if it is unreasonable. In short feelings are subject to reason also, and not beyond evaluation, but sometimes intuitive.
When we change our thoughts about something, it changes our feelings about it. An obvious example is the anger we might have for someone. When we find it's a mistaken identity, our feelings change, or if we find out that he is really a descent person. Any irrational thought, even subconscious, will make us feel uneasy. That is an intuition that is more or less physical, gut reactions and feelings. They announce that something is wrong and has to be looked at. It may be an actual illness, a problem that needs to be solved, that we pushed into the back of our minds, or a situation that needs changing.
Recognizing people is sometimes an unconscious process. My understanding is that recognizing an error in math is done unconsciously sometimes and then comes up into our consciousness. If there is no time delay, we may or may not call it intuition. If it is a deeper construct, then it is one qualification for being a valid intuitive thought.
Intuition should have more definitions to fit different models, but science doesn't seem to doubt that non verbal logic and vision logic are powerful additional tools to conscious reasoning. Aristotle said that we are not thinking without intuition. I suppose he had a rational definition. Einstein said, "The only real valuable thing is intuition." His definition seems close to mine, an idea that comes out of the blue and is correct.
How can you be biased about a word definition. "Intuition (philosophy), the act by which the mind perceives the agreement or disagreement of two ideas."
The police in the example is using habit from faulty reasoning, which develops into an instinct. They are all different words for what you are describing. It's not a matter of opinion or it's a matter of Websters opinion. The linguists who right Websters dictionary go to a lot of trouble to make distinctions between words and not run definitions all together. A word is not it's synonym. A synonym is a pointer to a word, defining it by showing what it is not, while it's in that family. 
As far as the emotional part of an intuition, behind every emotion there is a thought or thoughts so emotions are open to the rational process. A negative emotion shows that something is wrong, like an irrational thought, for instance. You are using a popular definition, even popular among scientist who are not linguists.
The reason it's a problem is because it is being made into a slang word, but not obviously. Saying that something that is hot, is cool is recognized as slang and doesn't cause much cognitive dissonance at all. Cognitive dissonance is used in hypnosis, so those who think they are rational and cool are actually open to manipulation by not understanding words. I hear supposed scientists saying misusing "common sense" to mean that which is irrational and 'counter-intuitive' as if irrational wasn't enough. It's like a Trojan horse in the mind or a virus in the computer.
As far as thinking you have something like ESP, an intuition would be to question the validity of ESP, unless you already don't believe in it, of course. Then you may not have any intuitions about it. If you do, then it's a signal to ask why.
Hrld11 (talk) 01:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Opinion

message: As per the question above. Should the two articles be merged?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 08:27, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed; merge with what is currently Intuition (psychology) as simply Intuition and create Intuition (disambiguation). These articles are not large and do not need to be separate. - Steve3849talk 18:35, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the difference between the subject of this article and [[Intuition (knowledge)]]? 

message: To be more comprehensive as both talk about same subject Shrikanthv (talk) 08:50, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Intuition (psychology)]]