"The point of rigour is not to destroy all intuition; instead, it should be used to destroy bad intuition while clarifying and elevating good intuition." - Terry Tao<p><a href="https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/there%E2%80%99s-more-to-mathematics-than-rigour-and-proofs" rel="nofollow">https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/there%E2%80%99s...</a>
The short answer is: it cuts both ways.<p>"Intuition" (or more generally, associative thinking) can definitely lead us astray. So can (superficially) analytical thinking that might appear to be based on a chain of logically sound, "if A, then B" statements but yet ultimately miss the bigger context, or otherwise just end up coming to warped or irrational conclusions.<p>So both strains of thought are needed. Especially if we're to stand any chance at all against the robots.
It's a useful instict that when properly used is very good. First if your gut is telling you something you must reason:is this something I've created all in my head? Or is this a reasonable feeling? Weigh both rationally and decide which is most likely the reason for your intuitions. If it proves to be irrational and caused by your own unreasonable thoughts and or feelings dismiss it. If it proves reasonable and not just irrational thinking then listen to your intuitions. Intuitions or gut feelings don't lie trust yourself!
I think using the word "intuition" does the concept an injustice. There are many different types of intuition - and they are unrelated. I've known some people who have an uncanny ability to predict outcomes or complexities. On the other hand, I've known people who blabber about feeling, refining their intuition, and incorporating intuition with their judgment - and they might as well just guess using a dartboard to make their decisions.