Logic or intuition?

I am merely curious, which one do you rely mostly when having a difficult decision? Logic or intuition? Or maybe something else?

Why this simple question? Hopefully, if we receive honest answers, we can examine something about the mindsets of ATS dwellers.

-v

reply to post by v01i0
Logic, logic and reasoning run the universe, theres a reason for everything. Yay reason !

Intuition is just like using logic except you can not explain it.

If you have a gut feeling about something, there normally is a reason but you just can not understand it at that moment.

Yeah, intuition is just unconscious drives. When you become familiar with what those are then you can use logic. Then you have a different set of unconscious drives and so on and so on.

reply to post by v01i0


I use both, to analyze problems, situations or just questions I may have.

Intuition usually wins when logic fails.

I use to always use logic until I realized that my instincts have a much broader library to tap. Instincts are guided by your subconscious which taps into infinity. Your logic limits you to a finite library of learned knowledge. Making big decisions are always steered by my instincts and NEVER do I allow logic to take over. Many times I've gone with decisions that make no sense and defy logic...but I trusted my instincts. 100% of the time, it was later revealed that had I gone with the logical decision it would have been soooo wrong and my instincts steered me on the correct path. I even use this process in trading stocks. I will get and uneasy feeling about a stock eventhough it's continuing to rise but I will sell because of the instinct and sure enough...the stock soon takes a dump.

[edit on 13-6-2010 by ptmckiou]

Some of you seem to have a problem understanding intuition. There's no "just" anything about intuition. It is everything. Feel your way through our existence here. Our five senses don't give us enough information to analyze what is real. You have to know. The only way to know is to feel it, to intuit what else there is out there. You have to sense it, to understand it via the exchange of energy. There's no logic that can do what intuition can. Heart > brain every time without exception.

I run it logically, often multiple times to double and triple check the logic. However, sometimes the logical answer still leaves you feeling uneasy with that decision. In those cases, I sit on it a bit to see if the uneasiness clears, and if it doesnt, I go with my gut.

So, logic is always in the picture, but my intuition has veto power.

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
There's no logic that can do what intuition can. Heart > brain every time without exception.

I absolutely could not disagree more. You are dead on wrong, and if you think that "following our "hearts" (as a stand in for intuition) would make for a better more "love and light" kinda world, I think you are deluding yourself.

Our "hearts" lead us often, (as a species) to some of the most horrific actions humanity has ever undertaken. Although our leadership may be logically planning the horrors, (Nazism for the most obvious, overused example) it is the sentiment or "heart" of the people that is manipulated in order to fuel the campaign.

Balance is good. It should not be all logic, but it certainly should also not be all heart. There is a time and a place for both.

Well, you know me ,I had to go look it up
and now I am more uncertain of my answer.

Take a mathmatical savant......
is that intuition or logic?
You get the drift of my NON-answer
I'm still pondering.

Definitions.


Intuition, in philosophy, way of knowing directly; immediate apprehension.
The Greeks understood intuition to be the grasp of universal principles by
the intelligence (nous), as distinguished from the fleeting impressions of
the senses. The distinction used by the Greeks implied the superiority of
intellectual intuitions over information received by the senses.
Christian thinkers made a distinction between intuitive and discursive knowledge:
God and angels know directly (intuitively) what men reach by reasoning.

René Descartes insisted that there are not two faculties of intuition
(the sensual and the intellectual) but only the faculty of intellect;
sensual experience, although it appears necessary in practice,
is not essential to knowledge.

John Locke and others criticized Descartes's position, and under
the influence of such criticism perception and the intellect came
to be regarded as two separate, intuitive faculties,
both necessary for genuine knowledge.

Immanuel Kant took sense perception to be the paradigm of intuition,
although pure intuitions of space and time were also basic to his system.

For Henri Bergson, intuition was an evolved, conscious form of instinct,
an unmediated experience of the external world or of the self.

Bertrand Russell formulated the conceptual-perceptual distinction
as the difference between knowledge by description and knowledge
by acquaintance and Russell also postulated a faculty analogous to
sensation that apprehended universals.

To know that all events are caused is to have learned the usage
of the terms event and cause.

Critics have argued that such a position confuses the learning of a
fact with the learning of a word.
The role intuition plays in mathematics and ethics
has provoked lively debate in the history of Western philosophy.
According to mathematical intuitionism, mathematical knowledge
rests on mathematical concepts that are immediately clear and
irreducible.
According to ethical intuitionism, there are fundamental ethical truths
that can be known directly and do not have to be inferred.

The Columbia Encyclopedia.
Copyright © 2001-09 Columbia University Press. All rights reserve

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


It's not a stand-in for intuition. It is intuition. Knowing can only happen in the heart. You can analyze and quantify and qualify till the cows come home, or you can listen to your heart.

Practice makes perfect.

Depends on the situation. I try to think logically first, but if my gut feeling is coming on strong, I go with that. It has kept me safe so far. Also I don't consider a gut feeling the same as "in your heart" types of feelings. If something feels wrong, your gut will give off stronger danger signals than your heart. My heart is usually wrong but when I get a gut feeling it has always been right. If that sounds completely illogical, well, it is, that's why I never trust my logic. I don't have much of that

reply to post by CosmicEgg


We will just have to agree to disagree.

I am not an enemy of intuition, by any stretch. I use it often, and like I have said, it has veto power in my life. But..........intuition is not the be all and end all. Logic is a very useful tool. I think it is a mistake to become so enamored even with something wonderful that it throws balance out the window.

www.apa.org...

And sometimes intuition defies logic in our decision-making. Seymour Epstein, PhD, an emeritus psychology professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and his colleagues demonstrated that people often ignore probability when teased by their gut intuition. Participants tried to draw a red jelly bean from jars of either 10 or 100 beans, most of which were white. The 100-bean jar contained seven red beans and the 10-bean jar contained one red bean. Even though the odds of drawing a red bean were better for the 10-bean jar (10 percent) than the 100-bean jar (7 percent), more participants chose to pick from the 100-bean jar. Why? Because the 100-bean jar actually had more red beans, and people's gut intuition indicated they would fare better in that jar because there were more red beans to pick.

Gambling is one of the areas where intuition often fails. There are reasons for this, and the article goes lightly over them.

I dont think it is just a matter of "practice." Science seems to indicate that the two systems arose to fill different roles, and they are both useful. Its a matter of knowing when to use what, and because "intuition" is heavily concerned with your survival, where that speed of conclusion is imperative, not ignoring danger signals from that sense in particular.

If Americans had sat down at any point in time and reasoned through the facts regarding 9-11, we would not have supported the attack of Iraq. Intuitively, emotionally, attacking something was the thing to do. And as far as nature is concerned, it IS the right thing to do. But reason would have guided us either to a better more appropriate target, or if the appropriate target was not available, to restraint.

Balance. Its easier with practice.

Originally posted by XxRagingxPandaxX
reply to post by v01i0

 

Logic, logic and reasoning run the universe, theres a reason for everything. Yay reason !

Yeah, but look at the world (this world, not the universe) these days, and how it is being run. If you think about that too long, you just might intuitively change your answer

Just trying to keep you safe. Balance is good

[edit on 13-6-2010 by snowspirit]

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Originally posted by CosmicEgg
There's no logic that can do what intuition can. Heart > brain every time without exception.

I absolutely could not disagree more. You are dead on wrong, and if you think that "following our "hearts" (as a stand in for intuition) would make for a better more "love and light" kinda world, I think you are deluding yourself.

Our "hearts" lead us often, (as a species) to some of the most horrific actions humanity has ever undertaken. Although our leadership may be logically planning the horrors, (Nazism for the most obvious, overused example) it is the sentiment or "heart" of the people that is manipulated in order to fuel the campaign.

Balance is good. It should not be all logic, but it certainly should also not be all heart. There is a time and a place for both.

Anyone who can target a certain group of people for their mass genocide most likely is using neither. Actually, they're probably using flawed logic if anything..

There's no right or wrong.. I'm sure sometimes you may mistake intuition for logic or vice versa anyway due to how quickly our brains works.

I will stand by a balance of both logic and intuition to guide us. Inner and outer influences in tandem will most likely give you the best results .

But maybe that's just my opinion? I dunno, just thought I'd offer a perspective!

Originally posted by ptmckiou
Your logic limits you to a finite library of learned knowledge.

That must be the case. Logics can be used effectively only when we have enough information at hand.

Usually I try to use logics when it is applicable - but when I have to say something about things I really haven't got clue, intuition is the only option. Although sometimes there's enough time and information around to go and learn about things.

About the debate which one is better - logic or intuition - I think that there is no answer. Both can be perfectly fine when applied in proper manner.

My method of evaluating decisions often starts with logics, and I try to get broader view by accumulating information, but if it's impossible because of any reason, I resort to intuition.

-v

reply to post by Ex


Definately no "intuitive" answer there

But yeah, that is also what I often do... ponder until it's too late

There are obviously times when intuition is very much needed - when the reaction must be fast, then there is no time for logical unless you've got very fast processing brains.

But what many has already said, the gut feelings are mostly correct; you just know it. But also there is danger to mix emotions with intuition. That is something which has caused wars.

-v

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

If Americans had sat down at any point in time and reasoned through the facts regarding 9-11, we would not have supported the attack of Iraq. Intuitively, emotionally, attacking something was the thing to do.

While the above statement is most likely true, I think that intuition and emotion are two distinct things. I sometimes have had emotions - I know, I don't have them very often But when I've had intuition, I couldn't mix it with emotion. Emotions can be contradictive - intuition cannot. But nevertheless they are close.

If americans would've had intution instead of emotions back then, they would've knew all is not right.

-v

[edit on 13-6-2010 by v01i0]

Both they are parts to the whole and all our faculties should be used in conjunction with one another. To rely on just one is to make decisions based on half running machinery. Logic is the first test of truth. If it doesn't make logical sense there is a good chance it is not true. Still sometimes we do not have all the information needed to make a decision so something may not make sense to us without all the information we need. intuition can come in there.

We see this often when people insist if it is not scientifically proven then it doesn't exist. Of course if we apply a little logic here we can see that is a fallacy since that would assume science knows all things which it doesn't.

It depends on the situation at hand. I consider my intuitive abilities to greatly exceed my analytical abilities for the most part. Still, as an INTP , I rely heavily on logically processing everything out.

If the situation calls for a rapid response, intuition takes charge. If the situation can be thought out for sometime, then it's a combination of the two. Usually I'll start with an intuitive hunch, then process that out. Rinse and repeat, until the "aha" moment arrives and everything surrounding the problem can be fully explained.

When I was in school, I relied heavily on intuition to do mathematics. I was the guy that could answer the problems much quicker than anyone else in class, yet rarely if ever was able to show my work. I think that if I had enough interest in doing so, it could be done, but for me it was too time consuming and without a point.

So, for most tasks, it's both working in unison. For tasks that require immediacy, it's mostly intuitive.