# data[].attributes.body
Is there anything you just know, without knowing exactly how you know? Are there skills you have which seemed innate? Do you ever suddenly see the big picture when before all you could envision was the detail? This then could be called intuition. Look at the definitions which follow...which seems best to you? Which do you recognise from your own experience as a knower?

# data[].attributes.body
“intuition is the result of the way our brains store, process and retrieve information on a subconscious level” (Professor Gerard Hodgkinson )

# data[].attributes.body
“Intuitions are the judgements, solutions and ideas that pop into our consciousness without our being aware of the mental processes that led to them. When you suddenly know the answer to a problem you’ve been mulling over or when you know that you like someone but can’t tell why, your knowledge is intuitive.” (Jonathan Haidt and Craig Joseph, quoted in ‘Theory of Knowledge, A Course Companion’ page 194)

# data[].attributes.body
"Intuition is an immediate form of knowledge in which the knower is directly acquainted with the object of knowledge." (Science Daily: Intuition)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
All too often, we hear terms like "hunch" or "gut feeling." And it is quite intimidating to see people being guided by some unknown force, a sixth sense, perhaps.

But how wise is it, really, to let your gut drive your decisions? And more importantly, is there anything like gut feeling at all?

The fact is, there is and there isn't. Gut feeling, or intuition, is developed over a period of time and is largely shaped by your past experiences, knowledge and professional encounters. It is not something you just develop.

In the decision-making process, relying on intuition only makes sense when you have a vast experience to back your hunches. Simply "feeling" that something is right or should be done is highly subjective and can drown you.

The rational approach

On the other hand, there is a more rational approach to making decisions. Data and analysis have long been associated with informed decisions, which reduces the likelihood of errors and increases the chances of success.

Big, systematic data is mostly the backbone of most of our decisions, personal and business alike. But with its extreme usability comes a catch: what do you do if you strongly feel something should not be done, even if the data insists that it should?

This seemingly easy question is what drives the need to understand the relationship between intuition and data in the decision-making process. Without making things complicated, the solution to this dilemma is using data and intuition in concert to arrive at the best possible decisions. Let's see why this approach works best.

Gut is important, but needs validation

It should be acknowledged that there are people who do best by relying on their intuition and inner wisdom. Leaders like Steve Jobs have been known to place great emphasis on their gut feelings, and incorporate it in most, if not all, of their decisions.

But having said that, it is equally important to realize that these gut feelings are not baseless. They are always backed by previous experiences or information, which acknowledges that intuitive decisions have worked in the past. Decisions are not about going out on a limb and braving the consequences just because you want to blindly trust your hunch. They are about combining your inner wisdom with the knowledge of systematic and scientific data to make the best decisions.

Rationality is not always practical

Sometimes, rational analysis and data are impractical to be employed in certain situations. Absence of a definitive criteria, time and resource constraints, and novel situations are all instances which limit the practicality of data. The only viable option is to rely on what your instincts tell you. In these scenarios, intuition is your savior and can help you make effective and quick decisions.

The combination of intuition and rational analysis produces well-rounded decisions by approaching an issue from various angles. It reduces the chances of making mistakes, and has increasingly become a favorite approach to decision-making among the leaders of today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
When to rely on intuition instead of analysis in your decision making - The Business Journals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All too often, we hear terms like "hunch" or "gut feeling." And it is quite intimidating to see people being guided by some unknown force, a sixth sense, perhaps. But how wise is it, really, to let your gut drive your decisions? And more importantly, is there anything like gut feeling at all?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Most of us experience 'gut feelings' we can't explain, such as instantly loving - or hating - a new property when we're househunting or the snap judgements we make on meeting new people. Now researchers at Leeds say these feelings - or intuitions - are real and we should take our hunches seriously.

According to a team led by Professor Gerard Hodgkinson of the Centre for Organisational Strategy, Learning and Change at Leeds University Business School, intuition is the result of the way our brains store, process and retrieve information on a subconscious level and so is a real psychological phenomenon which needs further study to help us harness its potential.

There are many recorded incidences where intuition prevented catastrophes and cases of remarkable recoveries when doctors followed their gut feelings. Yet science has historically ridiculed the concept of intuition, putting it in the same box as parapsychology, phrenology and other 'pseudoscientific' practices.

Through analysis of a wide range of research papers examining the phenomenon, the researchers conclude that intuition is the brain drawing on past experiences and external cues to make a decision - but one that happens so fast the reaction is at a non-conscious level. All we're aware of is a general feeling that something is right or wrong.

"People usually experience true intuition when they are under severe time pressure or in a situation of information overload or acute danger, where conscious analysis of the situation may be difficult or impossible," says Prof Hodgkinson.

He cites the recorded case of a Formula One driver who braked sharply when nearing a hairpin bend without knowing why - and as a result avoided hitting a pile-up of cars on the track ahead, undoubtedly saving his life.

"The driver couldn't explain why he felt he should stop, but the urge was much stronger than his desire to win the race," explains Professor Hodgkinson. "The driver underwent forensic analysis by psychologists afterwards, where he was shown a video to mentally relive the event. In hindsight he realised that the crowd, which would have normally been cheering him on, wasn't looking at him coming up to the bend but was looking the other way in a static, frozen way. That was the cue. He didn't consciously process this, but he knew something was wrong and stopped in time."

Prof Hodgkinson believes that all intuitive experiences are based on the instantaneous evaluation of such internal and external cues - but does not speculate on whether intuitive decisions are necessarily the right ones.

"Humans clearly need both conscious and non-conscious thought processes, but it's likely that neither is intrinsically 'better' than the other," he says.

As a Chartered occupational psychologist, Prof Hodgkinson is particularly interested in the impact of intuition within business, where many executives and managers claim to use intuition over deliberate analysis when a swift decision is required. "We'd like to identify when business people choose to switch from one mode to the other and why - and also analyse when their decision is the correct one. By understanding this phenomenon, we could then help organisations to harness and hone intuitive skills in their executives and managers."

The research is published in the current issue of the British Journal of Psychology. The article comprises a critical review of previously published theory and research within psychology and the wider behavioural sciences.

Journal reference:Hodgkinson, G.P., Langan-Fox, J. and Sadler-Smith, E. (2008). Intuition: A fundamental bridging construct in the behavioural sciences. British Journal of Psychology, 99, 1-27.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
consumer behavior; spirituality; psychology; behavior; educational psychology; child psychology; creativity; multiple sclerosis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Go With Your Gut -- Intuition Is More Than Just A Hunch, Says New Research

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Most of us experience 'gut feelings' we can't explain, such as instantly loving -- or hating -- a new property when we're househunting or the snap judgments we make on meeting new people. Now researchers say these feelings -- or intuitions -- are real and we should take our hunches seriously.

# data[].attributes.headline
I am going to let you supply your own terrible puns about this story!

# data[].attributes.subject
I am going to let you supply your own terrible puns about this story!

# data[].attributes.body
In history...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Image: University of Leicester/PA)

A WRITER told yesterday how her intuition led archaeologists to the lost remains of King Richard III.

Edinburgh-based Philippa Langley was researching a play on the king, known as Crookback because of his deformed spine, when she had a hunch she was standing on his grave.

She funded a dig of the site - a council car park in Leicester.

And DNA results have now confirmed a body found there was that of the 32-year-old king, who was killed at the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485.

It matches the genetic make-up of two living descendants of Richard.

The skeleton also has a curved spine, confirming contemporary accounts.

Philippa, who is secretary of the Scottish branch of the Richard III Society, recalled the visit which prompted the dig yesterday, saying: "It was a hot summer and I had goosebumps so badly and I was freezing cold.

"I walked past a particular spot and absolutely knew I was walking on his grave.

"I am a rational human being but the feeling I got was the same feeling I have had before when a truth is given to me."

Examination of the remains revealed the skull wounds which killed the king, along with a metal arrowhead in his back.

Scientists even found evidence he was stabbed through the right buttock after his death.

The car park was once the site of a church called Grey Friars, which ancient records said was the site of Richard's burial.

The 5ft 8ins skeleton was discovered in September, on the first day of a three-week dig. It was found just three feet below the ground.

DNA from the remains was found to match Michael Ibsen, a descendant of Richard III's family.

The Canadian-born furniture maker, who now lives in London, is a direct descendant of the king's sister, Anne of York.

A DNA match was also discovered between the remains and a second living descendant, who wished to remain anonymous.

Lead archaeologist Richard Buckley said the tests proved the remains were the king's "beyond reasonable doubt".

He said: "It is the academic conclusion that the individual exhumed is indeed Richard III, the last Plantagenet king of England.

"It has been an honour and
privilege for all of us to be at the centre of a project that has had such phenomenal global interest."

Buckley also revealed Richard III's remains were almost lost when a 19th-century toilet was built above his resting place.

Luckily, the grave was only slightly disturbed by the building's foundations, which missed the skeleton by a few inches.

Buckley said: "The remains were very vulnerable.

"A 19th-century brick outhouse came very close to destroying the grave altogether. The feet were missing, almost certainly as a result of later disturbances."

Dr Jo Appleby, from the University of Leicester, said: "The skeletal evidence provides a highly convincing case for identification as Richard III.

"The analysis of the skeleton proved that it was an adult male but was an unusually slender, almost feminine, build for a man.

"This is in keeping with historical sources, which describe Richard as being of very slender build."

Richard III ruled England for just two years. Shakespeare portrayed him as a tyrant and he was widely blamed for killing his nephews, the Princes in the Tower, to ensure his succession to the throne.

But some historians argue he was the victim of propaganda on behalf of Henry Tudor - who defeated him at Bosworth and became King Henry VII - and his heirs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Edinburgh-based writer reveals how her intuition led archaeologists to remains of King Richard III

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A WRITER told yesterday how her intuition led archaeologists to the lost remains of King Richard III. Edinburgh-based Philippa Langley was researching a play on the king, known as Crookback because of his deformed spine, when she had a hunch she was standing on his grave.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
DETECTIVES should rely on instinct or hunches as much as modern techniques and equipment, according to Home Office researchers.

The drive towards so-called intelligence-led policing is being challenged by research into solved cases that has found that hunches play a significant role. The research, aimed at reducing burglary, has confirmed what many long-serving officers know, and concludes that "well-tested conjectures provide a sound basis" for police work.

Although the Home Office report Developing Crime Reduction Plans: Some Examples from the Reducing Burglary Initiative is about burglary, police believe it can be more widely applied. The researchers say detectives should speak to local people to ask them for their hunches too. The report says: "The facts are used to test the conjectures. Well-tested conjectures provide a sound basis for planning an initiative."

Hunches about "what might be significant" should always be considered. The researchers gave a concrete example of where a hunch had paid off. A beat officer had long suspected that a particular street was being targeted by criminals. At the station, crime analysts had not identified the pattern, and it was only when the beat officer made his opinion known that he was found to be correct.

John Stalker, the former Deputy Chief Constable of Greater Manchester, agreed that hunches were important. Most detectives develop a knack of knowing whether people were telling the truth, he said, and that was often a good guide.

He said, "You obviously need to take into account information and evidence. But after doing a job for years you do develop a great inside knowledge into how criminals' minds work. Following a hunch can give you an insight into what has happened. Police forces have developed theories about crime, which can be very useful but are no replacement for experience."

Mr Stalker has his doubts about many television detectives. "I don"t think many CID officers operate like Columbo or Morse, just following their instincts in the face of all the evidence and being proved right. But some of the best detectives I have met do seem to have that ability to have an insight, call it intuition or a hunch or whatever, it does seem to work."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
By David Bamber, Home Affairs Correspondent

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
DETECTIVES should rely on instinct or hunches as much as modern techniques and equipment, according to Home Office researchers. The drive towards so-called intelligence-led policing is being challenged by research into solved cases that has found that hunches play a significant role.

# data[].attributes.headline
How can we distinguish between imagination and intuition

# data[].attributes.subject
How can we distinguish between imagination and intuition

# data[].attributes.body
Have a think about these examples...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Physics: Science, Discovery and Intuition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Intuition and discovery in Science - dreams

# data[].attributes.headline
And in ethics there is a theory CALLED intuitionism

# data[].attributes.subject
And in ethics there is a theory CALLED intuitionism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Bad points of intuitionism

Bad points of intuitionism

Philosophers object to intuitionism because:

they don't think that objective moral truths exist

they don't think that there is a process of moral intuition

there's no way for a person to distinguish between something actually being right and it merely seeming right to that person

if intuitionism worked properly, everyone would come to the same moral conclusions, but they don't

Objective moral truths don't exist

Many philosophers don't think that there are such things as objective moral truths. For them, moral statements are not factual statements about how the world is.

Furthermore, it might be claimed that we could never know the truth, even if it existed objectively, because knowledge requires testing in a properly scientific fashion, and that is not available for moral statements.

Moral intuition doesn't exist

The idea that human beings have something called moral intuition is superficially attractive, but doesn't easily stand up to inspection.

Is it another sense like sight or hearing? Probably not, since the moral truths that moral intuition should detect don't seem to be out in the physical world.

Nor is it a process of reasoning, because intuitionists usually rule that out, too.

Perhaps it shows itself in moral emotions, like feelings of guilt? But although human beings certainly have such feelings, the feelings could be the result of breaking internal mental rules of conduct or breaching cultural rules, rather than of breaking objective moral rules.

Seeming right may not be the same as being right

When an intuitionist ponders a problem the only things they have to work with are their feelings, thoughts and attitudes.

Working with these entirely subjective things the intuitionist arrives at moral intuitions, which he then puts forward as objective truths.

But how does the intuitionist get from the subjective to the objective?

People reach different ethical conclusions

If there are real objective moral truths, then they are presumably the same for everyone. Yet different people come to different conclusions faced with the same ethical problems.

Some people say that these moral truths are 'self-evident', but this just leaves the problem of different things being self-evident to different selves!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Intuitionism teaches that there are objective moral truths, and that human beings can find them by using their minds in a particular, intuitive way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Things Highly Intuitive People Do Differently