It’s generally been recognized that
anyone who is highly effective has a keenly developed sense of intuition that
they rely upon to make “judgment calls,” without a great deal of analysis. In spite of this, there has been a trend over
the course of many years to devalue human judgment in favor of a deliberate
decision-making process that favors quantification and algorithms over common
sense.
It can also be observed that, in
spite of the most meticulous processes, bad decisions are still made – and
quite often, they are made because of sophisticated decision-making apparatuses
that are worshipped with a near-religious faith and obeyed even when “common sense” would indicate that the
decision is bad. The faithful cast aside
their doubts and do something they “feel” to be wrong because they believe that
the decision-making mechanisms are smarter and better than their own intuition
and human logic.
As such, there seems to be a movement
toward returning to intuition for faster and better decisions – but there is
little value to switching to the opposite extreme. The decision-making solutions were put in
place precisely because human begins are subject to ignorance and arrogance,
which in tandem lead almost invariably to tragedy when a person with very
little knowledge feels he is an expert at anything and that his ideas are as
good as anyone else’s.
The problem may be that the notion of
“intuition” is poorly understood – thought to be a supernatural force that
alights on anyone out of the blue – and those who do not understand intuition
feel themselves capable of it, that “anyone can have a brilliant idea” even if
they have little knowledge of a subject.
Or worse, the feeling that people without knowledge are better at coming
up with new ideas because they are not burdened by the assumptions that
experienced people tend to make to eliminate ideas that disagree with
theory.
Properly understood, intuition is not
at all mystical or random: it comes from the recognition of a connection or a
pattern in the information about a given subject. Sometimes, this may come from recognizing
that existing theory has overlooked something, or has wrongly declared something
to be false or impossible. But more
often, it is simply something that has not need given adequate consideration.
However, to make connections and
recognize patterns, there must be knowledge of those things among which
connections and patterns can be found. A
person who knows nothing of pharmacology is unlikely to discover a miracle cure
by feeding random plants to patients.
It may have been possible to do so in the eighteenth century for a
dilettante to make a significant contribution because so little was known and
any knowledge would be new. Today, the
field has been studied exhaustively, and anything an amateur “discovers” by his
own tinkering is likely already well documented in textbooks on the subject.
As such, the greatest potential for
intuition is for knowledgeable person, experienced and studied in the field, to
seek out new connections – but at the same time to be willing to question the
assumptions inherent in the knowledge he already possesses, particularly when
they are barriers to success. Real
barriers do exist, and cannot be simply imagined or wished away – but an
amateur approaching an established field does not have the ability to recognize
the difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment