Role of Intuition in the Process of Decision Making
This is an essay I submitted to UCL Erhvervsakademi og Professionshøjskole in Vejle (Denmark) for the Elective of Advanced Philosophy of Science during the 2nd semester of attending the BA in Innovation and Entrepreneurship.
What is intuition?
A common topic that gets discussed a lot and has caused a lot of controversies, both in psychology and philosophy, is whether decision making is solely based on rational thinking? My claim is that it is not: I believe, as many others do, that decision making cannot be only rational but it needs to have an intuitive component involved. However, having a certain amount of intuition taken into account in the process means primarily that emotions and feelings are actively participating — and that is, for many, a questionable subject to discuss.
Let me take a few steps back then, and have a look at the concept of “intuition”. By definition, intuition is “the ability to understand or know something immediately based on one’s feelings rather than facts.” However, even with the presence of an actual, black on the white, definition of what intuition is, it is still hard to conceptualise its role. It is generally considered a form of judgement. So, is it necessary to involve an emotion-focused type of judgement in the process of making the right decision? And is intuition, by itself, reason enough to base one’s decisions on it?
Intuition in Philosophy
One of the most famous statements that touch on this subject was from René Descartes: “I think therefore I am” which was the starting point of his philosophy. He considered doubtful everything that had the smallest potential of being doubted including his own beliefs, as he considered them fruits of misleading senses and imagination. The only thing he could not doubt was his own existence.
His philosophy was rejected by many throughout the years as his philosophy did not only touch on the topic of human existence but also on the topic of thinking being only rational. Therefore, I will be focusing on Damasio’s and Kahneman’s work, as they have both contributed largely to the reflection of the mentioned topic from both psychological and neurological points of view with a philosophical approach.
Last but not least, there have been many other contributors to this topic throughout history that I am not going to touch upon as it would take me in too many different directions.
Yet to summarise, intuition is mainly at the base of philosophy itself. With the number of hypotheses that can be brought up in this field, there needs to be a stimulus-driven by feelings in order to choose whether something is right or wrong, to provide justification and fight for one’s beliefs, in comparison to science which is based on observation and analysis and has way less intuitive stimulus involved.
Descartes’ Philosophy
Since I have already mentioned Descartes and I will certainly mention him again, I am going to briefly analyse his philosophy and the reason it sparked so much discussion, as well as why some may believe it to be wrong.
Descartes’ philosophy starts from the premise that one should never trust anything or anyone if they have deceived one even once — stating that our senses do deceive us from time to time and should therefore not be trusted. Descartes was a mathematician besides being a philosopher, which is probably why his point of view was so rationalist — he loved the certainty and evidence of mathematics’ reasoning. He believed that in order to find the truth it is necessary for one to doubt everything at least once in their life, besides which he additionally considered the mind to be “weak” because it was prone to error. He was a firm believer in doubt, not scepticism.
He believed so much in the power of the mind, stating how even though every human primarily and naturally was driven by the equal “reason”, each one of us could reorient our mind to accomplish different things. “Our opinions differ not because some of us are more reasonable than others, but solely because we take our thoughts along different paths and do not attend to the same things.”
Now taking his point of view into consideration, is it possible “not to trust” our senses? Do we have the strength to ignore our feelings in order to only focus on reason and facts? That is what I am going to discuss with the help of two different approaches to this issue. As much as doubting everything sounds like a reasonable enough method for getting a different perspective on things, is doubting our “gut” really a good idea? Our mind and body are connected and work in such a way that our mind sends signals to our body when we are in danger or about to get ourselves in a bad situation, and we can literally physically feel the discomfort telling us to escape. The subconscious of our mind is so powerful that it senses the surroundings without us putting any effort into this action.
There are many who have rejected his claim “I think therefore I am” with very reasonable disclaims mainly because Descartes’ statement is articulated imperfectly. It can be taken in many ways and looked at from very different perspectives, which is probably the reason it is such a popular argument. Now, some may argue that what Descartes actually tried to logically establish here is what is evident to men through intuition. However, with the claim being phrased the way it is, it is hard to address questions in regard to the matter as it is hard for intuitive knowledge to be expressed logically.
RATIONAL THINKING VS INTUITIVE THINKING — Kahneman’s Approach
Kahneman explains his theory of behavioural psychology about decision making and judgement in his book titled “Thinking Fast and Slow” — where he explains the difference between rational thinking and intuitive thinking by dividing the mind into two distinct systems.
According to him, there are two systems that are being used during the process of decision making, which he chooses to call System 1 and System 2 simply to create a more figurative clarification for the reader. System 1 operates automatically and quickly with little or no effort and no sense of voluntary control, it is based on skills, perception, impression and intuition — that is fast, unconscious, intuitive thinking that uses the “gut reaction” approach. While System 2 retrieves information, it is deliberate and processed, and based on effort and reflection — that is slow, conscious, rational thinking that uses the “critical thinking” approach.
Kahneman presents plausible examples in his book to back up his claim and better explain the systems. The example he uses for System 1 is looking at a person that is in a specific emotional state (perhaps, “angry”) — one figure out instantly how the person is feeling and can intuitively predict what is going to happen next (how they are going to talk, or in the case of “angry”, if they are going to shout). Though if one looks at 17x24 — one has to stop and take some time to think about the resulting number. That is a conceptualised explanation of the two systems. The time span of these two actions is the most obvious difference.
RATIONAL THINKING VS INTUITIVE THINKING — Damasio’s Approach
Damasio describes his scientific discoveries in neuroscience through a series of case studies to prove that emotions are indeed involved in the process of thinking and decision making in his book titled “Descartes’ Error” — where he dives deeper and compares different cases with the same consequences.
The problems his patients face are social and result from brain damage, principally a change in character with speech, motor skills and memory remaining highly unaffected. Throughout his laboratory research, Damasio focuses a lot on the intelligence of his patients by running different IQ tests on them and consequently being fascinated by their outstanding results, as he could not fathom the odds of them performing normally on many and even most IQ tests considering their abnormalities of social behaviour. He later comes to the conclusion that the patients are unable to make a choice and thus come to a resolution by themselves, not because of their intelligence, which has clearly not been affected, but because of their lack of emotions.
What Damasio states, as a result, is that with the use of only rational thinking it is hard, or even impossible to come to a conclusion or resolution mainly because there needs to be an emotional impulse involved, otherwise one can rationalise forever.
Definition of Decision
After getting a clear overview of the psychological and neurological point of view of the matter — that rationality and intuition are two parallel systems, and thus dual processes — the question that comes up next is: what is a “decision”? By definition, a decision is “a conclusion or resolution reached after consideration.” Now by saying that, it is somewhat logical to suppose that rational thinking is more than enough to come to a conclusion. With all the facts being laid out, all a person has got to do is weigh out the pros and cons of a situation and the answer will be given by the algorithm.
However, Damasio knows that is not the case. According to him emotion, feeling and biological regulation all play a role in human reason. In neurology, there are considered to be two levels of brain regions and both cooperate in the making of reason: high-level and low-level. The lower levels are the ones that regulate the processing of emotions and feelings, along with other body functions necessary for the organism’s survival. He, therefore, claims that feelings and emotions are internal guides that help us communicate, and from his point of view they are as cognitive as other percepts.
“Without the possibility of sensing body states that can be painful or pleasurable — there would be no suffering or bliss, no longing or mercy, no tragedy or glory.” — Antonio Damasio on the two brain regions.
So what happens when we consider “eating” as an example of a choice? According to Kahneman, these kinds of “choices” are habitual, therefore they are reached within the first system as they are decisions that we reach automatically — we do not spend time thinking about them. Eating is a habit: when one is hungry and one is given food, one will eat. There is no need to consider whether it is a good idea or not.
However, the same thing can be applied to the example of “breathing” as a choice, however with both examples I would be entering more into biology — mainly primal body functions and needs connected to survival that motivate our behaviour — so I am not going to step any further into that direction.
Now, talking about “decisions” and “choices” and having understood the difference between rational and intuitive thinking, is there a difference between a “choice” and a “decision”? Well, primarily it can be said that a choice is more of a mindset approach, meaning that we have a perception of what the right or wrong choice may be. While a decision is more of process orientation, meaning that we are going through analysis and steps to eliminate options. So it can, to some extent, be said that a choice is made when using System 1 and a decision is made when using System 2. However, even while going through a decision — a choice has to be made at some point. Even though both the systems of the brain are actively involved, there needs to be a final verdict at some point.
Mind or Brain?
An interesting question to reflect on is whether the mind and brain are two distinct things? This is a topic that has been discussed and argued upon for many centuries. There is an inclination to say that the brain is in fact an actual organ of the human body, which makes it tangible and thus part of the visible, whereas the mind is the manifestation and projection of thoughts, beliefs, feelings, emotions and imagination, and thus part of the invisible. The role of the brain is to process, translate and conceptualise what is in the mind.
“Intuition may manifest itself as an image or narrative. Historical and anecdotal accounts testify to the important role that imagery plays in creative and intuitive functioning. Many scientists and technologists attach a great deal of importance to mental images in the process of idea generation, scientific problem solving, and invention.”
Descartes associated the mind with consciousness and self-awareness, while the brain was the centre of intelligence itself for him. However, according to Damasio, the mind exists “in” and “for” an integrated organism — which leads to an interplay between the body and the brain. This interplay is considered crucial not only when it comes to decision making, but also in evolution and individual development.
So the mind and brain are indeed two separate concepts. It is possible to have a disease of the “brain” as it is possible to have a disease of the “mind” — differentiating thus “neurological” and “psychological” problems. The misconception and misinterpretation of the same come from a cultural inheritance which affects society and medicine. This ignorance leads to thinking that diseases of the brain are tragedies and people cannot be blamed for their condition, while diseases of the mind are social inconveniences for which the victims are responsible. Individuals are to be blamed for their character flaws and defective emotional modulation because of the lack of willpower as the primary problem.
Neither Descartes nor Damasio is stating implausible theories, they actually seem to have found a common understanding in this case. The mind and brain are definitely two separate concepts, however, they both are crucial for successful reasoning and, as a consequence, decision making.
That leads to the question: does intuition come from the mind then? From my point of view, I believe it does as that is where the feelings and emotions come to life. From Damasio’s descriptions of his cases, one can learn that the body by itself is just a motoric shell that gets things done according to the brain’s commands being sent to it. However, what distinguishes every person is the soul, the mind, and intuition. Without feelings and emotions, a person loses character, so those things are crucial for building a personality. We are constantly evolving and developing ourselves, changing and growing, becoming more and more unique with time and experience — but it is necessary for feelings and emotions to be involved in this journey, otherwise one does not gain any awareness of themselves and their life.
Artificial Intelligence
It is a known fact that technology seems to be developing at high speed, bringing in artificial intelligence as one of the most formidable innovations in human history. Nevertheless, is it possible for humans to manufacture themselves via robotics with a high IQ? Most definitely, the only difference is the lack of emotions.
“In the future, machines will be able to give you an entire plan for the event or meeting you are going to, rather than just giving the best possible route there. These machines will consider who else is going and what their preferences are, past experiences, and what to do after the event or meeting. In a sense, machines will be offering us advice.”
Sadly, that makes complete sense as even nowadays technology is processing information and making decisions at a fast pace thanks to their algorithm. Us humans, on the other hand, tend to spend so much time and mental energy going over our emotions when making a decision. It is just proof of how much our feelings influence our rational thinking.
Of course, technology can be configured and adjusted to the point of giving “feelings” and “emotions” to robotics, who knows what the future of this field has in store. If we were programmed like robots with an algorithm that would always find the path to the best decision without the interference of other thoughts though, a lot of things would be different in our world — perhaps that is the beauty of our minds: the creativity, passion and empathy that comes with it.
Gut Feeling
So, why do people sometimes choose not to do the “ideal” thing? When can you trust intuition and when should you not? Why is it that when there is an emotional inclination to do something, some tend to go against it anyway because reason takes over the emotional state or vice versa? Is the gut feeling always right?
This is a pretty popular topic in today’s society that is often answered with claims from the same point of view — which is a personal experience. When asked, the majority of the people will say to always follow one’s intuition, certainly because they have not followed it in the past and have been proven that they should have had, in fact, followed what their gut has been telling them.
But even in those cases, it is unlikely that a person has done the “right” thing without using a minimal amount of rationality — within the bounds of possibility they ended up doing something foolish instead, because as we have already discussed one needs to weigh out their options to make a decision.
It is plausible to believe that this gut feeling is, to some extent, the product of one’s cultural upbringing. The distinction of what is to be considered “normal” or “abnormal” to different people comes primarily from different cultures, which can affect the way one chooses to perform in specific situations. Past experience plays a big role as well — different types of trauma can lead the person into believing that a situation may be dangerous for their well being because they have seen it all before and it is unlikely for a person to want to go through the same repeatedly. I personally do believe the gut feeling can be minimised to some extent as much as it can be trained.
There are many methods for enhancing one’s intuition, which focuses on becoming more aware of one’s surroundings, listening to one’s feelings, observing their own energy levels, and doing any sort of meditation in order to process said things. With the ability to become aware of what one is feeling deep inside, a person is put in an advantaged position when it comes to making decisions or choosing a path to follow. It is therefore possible to learn to distinguish when one can trust their intuition — as long as a person gets to know themselves from deep within.
“The challenge is for executives to extend, possibly through training, self-development, feedback, and coaching, their own repertoire of skills and strategies for intuitive judgment and to apply them frequently and naturally, and in doing so acquire a more comprehensive armoury of decision-making skills.”
Influence can additionally play a role in this matter. With the number of books and believers in intuition, perhaps sometimes one gets influenced and manipulated into believing that one feels certain emotions that are not necessarily there — they may be similar to what the person is experiencing but they might not be processed as the right emotions, which could lead to a misinterpretation of the “intuition” that the person is feeling. Perhaps, Descartes was right to say the mind is weak. In the same way, one can be influenced to follow their intuition, they can be influenced not to give any attention to it at all, as it is considered by some to be “bullshit”.
“Gut feelings are inevitable, but effective learning from them is not. Paying particular attention to the success of intuitions is important because we are all prone to fears, emotions, and sources of bias which may impact the efficacy of intuitive decision-making. Testing out the validity of gut feelings over time can help an individual executive determine how much trust she or he can put in them.”
Was Descartes’ error really an error?
Descartes had his motives for what he claimed and believed in, and he did set an exciting argument for many to dive into. However, some may argue that his statements are flawed, and I stand with them. As much as rationality seems to be the best option, as it makes logically more sense, one should always be aware of their emotions and learn how to deal with them — accept them, process them, and understand them — in order to successfully reach apprehension, even though they can mislead us sometimes.
Descartes said that the existence of his thought meant that he, himself, existed. But perhaps only existing is not enough. Perhaps what we really need is to live and feel alive and in order to accomplish that we need to feel and not only think. This leads to the thought of individuals, who have no amount of empathy or feelings in them, being victims of a disease. Consequently, they are unable to use the intuitive system of their mind-brain damage has to be involved.
Damasio’s and Kahneman’s work brought a lot of enlightenment on the topic of intuition. Even though it is mainly psychology and neurology, their theories are written and explained in such a way that it is easy for any reader to perceive.
Therefore, to conclude, I can say that, based on these readings that I have focused on, I stand by my initial claim: unless there is some sort of damage that affects the brain parts that are connected to emotions and feelings, decision making is based on both intuition and rationality.
Thanks for reading until the end! I hope there was something useful in it for you. Enjoyed my essay? Recommend me by clicking the clap icon below and feel free to leave constructive criticism or your own opinion on the topic.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Descartes’ Error, Antonio Damasio, 1994, Putnam Publishing
Thinking Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, 2011, Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Discourse on Method, René Descartes, 1641
The Intuitive Executive: Understanding and Applying “Gut Feel” in Decision Making, E. Sadler-Smith and E. Shefy, 2004, Academy of Management ExecuBve
Intuition and its Role in Strategic Thinking, Gisle Henden, 2004, BI Norwegian School of Management
Mankind is Getting Ready to Turn Over Most Decisions to Robots, Allan Smith, 2014, Business Insider
