Assertion: intuition | /r/HasProperty | reliable
Facets:
value: sometimes
type: TEMPORAL
value: regarding the domains
type: OTHER
Source sentences:
text: We lack independent justification for the belief that intuitions are reliable.
text: To support the present (limited) skeptical argument, however, it must be parlayed into an argument that intuitions are so unreliable as to fail to justify belief at all.
text: That explains why intuitions are useful for science, but can’t be relied on.
text: Such arguments maintain either that (a) the fact that our best explanations of the occurrence of intuitions (i.e., intuitings) do not appeal to the truth of their contents is reason to think we are not justified in accepting such contents, or that (b) the fact that we cannot provide any explanation of how our intuitions are or could be reliable regarding the domains about which they might initially appear to inform us, is reason to think we are not justified in believing their contents.
text: If we have good reason to think that there is no explanation of why our intuitions are reliable, then we are not justified in believing p on the basis of the intuition that p .
text: We have good reason to think that there is no explanation of why our intuitions are reliable.
text: Why suppose intuitions like this are reliable?
text: Many working on this project hold that the empirically discovered variation in intuitions gives us reason to believe that intuitions are unreliable (Alexander et al. 2010).
text: In short, intuitions are sometimes unreliable and must be tested—at least if you want to know the truth— but without them we would be unable to develop new insights and knowledge.