Thoughts on Intuition

One of the ideas I've thought about a lot of late is the notion of intuition. What is it exactly? What role does it play in our lives? Is it a good thing or not?

The source of my interest in intuition is not just one book or personal experience, but several. It is brought about by a variety of subjects, including physics and mathematics, as well as history and current events. It is a theme that pops up again and again in the books I read, so I figure it is worth exploring.

According to dictionary.com, intuition is the "direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process." Also, it is "a keen and quick insight." The "independent of any reasoning process" part is what catches my attention, as this separates the idea of intuition from science.

Of course, intuition does serve a purpose in our day-to-day life. Without it, we would be forced to consider various possibilities we face every day without referring to past experience. For example, if I fail to set my alarm, my intuition may tell me that I'll wake up late and not get to work on time. I don't need to consider every single day whether I should set the alarm. But this is not such an important example of intuition. It is when we make decisions based on probability -- which can also be called incomplete knowledge -- that intuition tends to muddy things up.

In the book The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives, physicist Leonard Mlodinow describes how intuition comes from experience, and the perceived causal connection between events/actions. He notes the research done by scientist Daniel Kahneman, who found that people often make false connections based on intuition. The example was a group of Israeli air force flight instructors who argued that they could change the behaviour of their pilots by yelling at them after they messed up. In the same vein, these instructors usually found that praising the pilots for doing a good job resulted in poorer performance the next flight. Therefore, they logically deduced that praise was a waste of time, while punishment brought about the desired effect.

Kahneman eventually realized that what was happening was a phenomenon called 'regression to the mean' (p.8). Extreme performances (either good or bad) are beyond the norm, and they tend to return to a more average performance in subsequent trials. In other words, there was no cause/effect relationship, but the instructors' intuition told them otherwise. Throughout the 1960's, research found that people's intuition about randomness failed them.

Mlodinow later discussed another phenomenon that tends to support a false trust in intuition, the 'confirmation bias' (p.189). "When we are in the grasp of an illusion... instead of searching for ways to prove our ideas wrong, we usually attempt to prove them correct." He also quotes Francis Bacon: "The human understanding, once it has adopted an opinion, collects any instances that confirm it, and though contrary instances may be more numerous and more weighty, it either does not notice them or else rejects them, in order that this opinion will remain unshaken" (p.189). So, humans have the unmatched ability to ignore facts when they disagree with intuition.
--------------------------
Richard Feynman was possibly the smartest man of the twentieth century. I have only begun to learn about his impact on science through reading the book The Pleasure of Finding Things Out, and through viewing a number of interviews with him on YouTube.



One of his points that really struck me in the above video is how he desired to speak to knowledgeable men, those men who had explored their subject as deeply as possible to the point where they have nothing left but more questions (for nature holds many mysteries). This statement implied that most people don't have complete knowledge upon which to base their conclusions. We think we "know" something when, in fact, we are guessing or assuming the truth of the matter. We are greatly impacted culturally by superstition or so-called common sense. And this is, in part, why intuition tends to confuse us rather than enlighten.

In my own world, I sometimes wonder about history (in the sense of the official story that is taught in schools and taken for granted within a culture at large). How certain should we be about what we think we know? My intuition tells me that what we learn in Canadian history classrooms is what actually happened. I am led to believe that Canadians have fought valiantly in wartime. And yet, I remember talking to an old Korean man one night many years ago in Seoul who had been in the Korean War. He told me that the Canadian soldiers he saw behaved like cowards. This assault on my common knowledge of the Canadian soldier was a major affront to my pride. But what if it were true? Do we tend to get duped by what our cultural myths would have us believe? I believe it is foolish to think otherwise. It is intuitive to believe that which we are constantly told unless we learn to doubt. Question authority, goes the old saying.

Should intuition be ignored? For daily routine, I doubt it matters if we follow intuition. But in matters where people tend to have opposing points of view or a different cultural background, intuition is probably the greatest barrier to seeing the truth. Once we recognize this, we can learn to control our impulse to accept that which we assume.

Random Thoughts

I've just finished reading chapter one of Steven Johnson's latest, The Invention of Air. This follows my recent completion of The Drunkard's Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives, where Leonard Mlodinow eloquently explained the mathematical concepts behind random actions. Both books deal with the matter of how events often develop out of thin air (much more so than we could ever imagine). In particular, both writers discuss how great leaps forward in conceptual thinking are typically the result of sheer luck -- being in the right place at the right time.

Which is not to say that people aren't deserving of their fame and legacy. It's just that in addition to having a good dose of smarts, it never hurts to have the good fortune of being in a time and place where someone else recognizes your genius. It's safe to say that there have been many more geniuses in the history of our world who didn't benefit from such luck, and therefore did not grace us with whatever insights they may have developed. But that's just the way it is. Occasionally you hit in a game of roulette; more often, you miss.

On a personal note, in recent days I've run into two situations that seem to be pure cases of randomness. First, a buddy of mine suddenly contracted a bacterial infection in his elbow that, if not for quick action by doctors, would have led to flesh-eating disease. The doctors had very little explanation for the way the bacteria in his arm all decided to congregate and attack his elbow. But that's something that will happen at random. We all have bacteria in our bodies, and usually we handle them just fine; for some reason, the bacteria in my friend's body turned on him. There's probably no point looking for a reason. It may have just been a random (bad) luck of the draw.

The other incident took place at a bookstore in Seoul this past weekend. While browsing for a good book to buy (the one that eventually became The Invention of Air), a young Korean man who had been standing next to me for a few moments suddenly asked if I worked for JLS. Since I do, I said yes. He then asked if my name was Phil. I was clearly surprised, and I went on to learn that he had been in a class of mine some four or five years earlier. He was now a student at New York University who was doing a summer internship in Korea. So, in a city of over ten million people, a guy I met maybe a dozen times in a writing class years earlier now recognized me. Seems almost bizarre on the surface. But I would have to guess that the odds of such a meeting are not that astronomical since I have taught thousands of students in my years in Korea. In spite of aging, at least one of those students was bound to know me, and we just happened to be in the right place at the right time.

For the past couple of days, I've wondered what (if any) significance there is to be gleaned from this chance encounter. Perhaps it comes in the comment he made that despite the fact many of the students in that class were being ignorant and inattentive (paraphrasing), he personally liked the class. Over the years, there have been certain classes where I've been so turned off by the general apathy of the students that I've forgotten that one or two of them may actually have been getting something from the course. In other words, this encounter may have been my wake-up call to not throw in the towel when I get frustrated with a class. Not all of the students are wasting their time, and it is my responsibility to reach those who care. Well, okay, it's my responsibility to reach ALL students -- I know, I get that. But I shouldn't lump them all together.

And this leads me to some thoughts about another book I read recently: Teacher Man by Frank McCourt. He gained fame a few years ago for his Pulitzer prize-winning memoir Angela's Ashes. In Teacher Man, McCourt tells of his 30 years as a teacher in New York City high schools, of his struggle to reach students under difficult circumstances. It is a wonderful ongoing story that is easy to relate to for any teacher. Some of his thoughts, gleaned from in-the-moment situations, particularly struck me: "If you bark or snap (at the students), you lose them. That's what they get from parents and the schools in general... If they strike back with the silent treatment, you're finished in the classroom... They have you by the balls and you created the situation." Yikes! And so true.

Teaching... history... randomness... the future -- what does it hold?