Skills

Don=E2=80=99t Suppress Your Intuition
Intuitions aren't irrational.

Elliot Temple

22 Sep 2022 =E2=80=A2 10 min read

Share

=09 =09 =09

Table of Contents

=09 =09 =09

A common misconception about rationality is that intuition shoul= d be ignored or suppressed. People contrast rational, conscious, explicit i= deas with irrational intuitive or subconscious ideas. Some people think =E2= =80=9Chunches=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cgut feelings=E2=80=9D are irrational. T= hey may also regard many or all emotions as irrational.

People often = lose debates (in terms of arguments that each side can put into words) but = still have intuitions (or emotions or anything else they can=E2=80=99t arti= culate) that conflict with the arguments that won the debate. If you=E2=80= =99re in that situation, don=E2=80=99t try to make yourself believe or = act on the new ideas.

You should accept and act on ideas when th= ere are no problems with doing so. Having conflicting intuitions i= s a problem. When there is a problem or disagreement, and you don=E2=80=99t= already have a fully satisfactory answer, you should not make ass= umptions about what the correct answer is. Your intuition could be right. A= nd don=E2=80=99t assume it=E2=80=99s unlikely to be right. As a default, yo= u should view any of your ideas as having approximately the same chance of = being right.

The rational way to debate, when you can=E2=80=99t artic= ulate all your ideas, is to say things like =E2=80=9CI have an intuition wh= ich conflicts with that idea. I intuitively don=E2=80=99t want to believe o= r do that idea.=E2=80=9D You should communicate the problem even if you can= =E2=80=99t provide details. You and a rational debate partner could then tr= y to brainstorm ways of proceeding that could address the conflict between = the idea and your intuition. This could involve getting more information ab= out the intuition or you learning more about the topic. Maybe if you unders= tand the issues in more depth then your intuition will change or will be ea= sier to put into words.

Getting more information about your intuition= can be done by introspection. If you=E2=80=99re not good enough at introsp= ection, the debate can be put on hold to develop that skill more. That can = be hard and take a long time. There are alternatives which are more accessi= ble. You can do free writing, journaling or brainstorming to try to get you= r thoughts out more even in rough form. Being informal and trying to say an= ything even if it=E2=80=99s wrong or barely relevant can help you put thoug= hts into words instead of being totally stuck. If you do journaling or anot= her activity alone, and it works, you can then choose to share some specifi= c ideas you figured out.

Gathering Data Points from Intuitions

Often, you can learn a lot a= bout intuitions by asking questions (you and your debate partner can both c= ontribute to this). If the situation was X, what side would your intuition = take? What if the situation was Y? What about Z? Keep checking a bunch of d= ifferent scenarios and giving your intuitive response to them and then you= =E2=80=99ll be able to figure out in much more detail what the intuition sa= ys and wants. With trial and error, you can figure out what issues make a k= ey difference that determine what side the intuition takes and which issues= don=E2=80=99t matter much. This can help narrow down what your intuitive p= osition is and enable discussing it and talking about upsides and downsides= of it, problems it has, etc. And it can help you figure out the reason for= the intuition.

For example, you might have some pro-capitalist views= but make exceptions when something seems unkind. If you figure out what so= me exceptions are where your intuition takes a more anti-capitalist view, t= hen you might see a pattern in them where they=E2=80=99re all related to so= meone having a bad outcome and being unhappy, and you don=E2=80=99t like th= at. Then progress could be made by considering the harmony of interests the= ories that go with capitalism. Your intuition is probably at least partly r= ight; a lot of =E2=80=9Chard-hearted=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Cunkind=E2=80=9D c= apitalist ideas are in fact wrong and conflict with classical liberalism in= addition to conflicting with many people=E2=80=99s moral intuitions. You s= houldn=E2=80=99t accept an unsophisticated, mean version of capitalism that= creates winners and losers instead of mutual benefit; your intuition was c= orrect that something was wrong there.

The basic idea is to gather da= ta points about your intuition by asking questions and posing scenarios. Th= is works because your intuition tells you responses to things. The response= s are often just =E2=80=9Cgood=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Cbad=E2=80=9D (either in= a binary way or on a spectrum with degrees) rather than words you can arti= culate. But that=E2=80=99s still data, and if you get a bunch of data point= s you can find patterns. The patterns help you figure out what the intuitio= n is about. The data points also help you rule things out by finding counte= r-examples to candidate explanations of what the intuition is about.

Mental Models of Intuitions

You = can think of an intuition like a mini person inside you with some ideas and= values, but who only communicates in limited ways, so you=E2=80=99re tryin= g to figure out what they want and think. You can also think of an intuitio= n like an idea, just like any other, which has some knowledge and reasoning= =E2=80=93 which isn=E2=80=99t in words but could be in words and = is the same knowledge whether it=E2=80=99s in words or not. So you can view= an intuition as wanting, valuing, saying or thinking something, just as yo= u would talk about an explicit idea. That=E2=80=99s an approximation becaus= e it=E2=80=99s people who value, want, say or think things. But it=E2=80=99= s understandable and we don=E2=80=99t have some well known and clearly bett= er mental models to use. Our mental models tend to mix up people and people= =E2=80=99s ideas some, which makes sense because ideas are the most importa= nt part of people.

Debates and Discussions Involving Intuitions

Being unable to full= y articulate ideas doesn=E2=80=99t make them wrong. Being barely able to ar= ticulate ideas doesn=E2=80=99t make them wrong. You shouldn=E2=80=99t accep= t ideas when you have ideas that conflict with them. Instead, you should ta= ke a more neutral stance. When there is a conflict of ideas that isn=E2=80= =99t yet resolved, then you don=E2=80=99t know the answer. You sho= uldn=E2=80=99t assume your intuition is right and stick with it, nor should= you try to use willpower to get rid of your intuition in favor of a new id= ea. You should become curious and want to explore the issue (particularly i= f it=E2=80=99s important to your life; if it=E2=80=99s irrelevant or low im= portance then feel free to drop the matter and prioritize other stuff).

When you understand issues well enough, and your conscious understanding= is correct, your intuition will change. If your intuition hasn=E2=80=99t c= hanged, then either the explicit idea has a flaw or it=E2=80=99s incomplete= in some way. The incompleteness could be your knowledge (the other guy in = the debate needs to explain more but does know the answer) or it could be i= n the idea itself (the other guy=E2=80=99s idea is incomplete too, and he d= idn=E2=80=99t realize that). Sometimes the incompleteness is on a different= topic than what you=E2=80=99re discussing. For example, you could be debat= ing history but have difficulty changing your mind due to some lack of know= ledge about rationality, bias, integrity or learning.

Unless you=E2= =80=99re extraordinarily good at explicit, conscious analysis, then you sho= uld talk about intuitions frequently in debates and discussions. Trying to = put things into words more, or talk about things you can=E2=80=99t explain = well, are common, normal parts of debates. Any social pressure against that= is irrational and is suppressing progress.

Looking at it from the ot= her side (of someone who is good at explicit arguments), if you want to win= debates and change people=E2=80=99s minds in good, rational ways then you = need to address all their problems and objections, including intuitive ones= . If you haven=E2=80=99t addressed all their ideas which conflict with your= idea, then they shouldn=E2=80=99t change their mind to your idea, and you = would be wrong to ask or want them to. You haven=E2=80=99t really won the d= ebate with them.

You should encourage people to share intuitive objec= tions so you can help address them. If you discourage that, then people won= =E2=80=99t tell you what the problem is and you won=E2=80=99t know what to = say to change their mind. You need information from them about what they do= n=E2=80=99t like or feel bad about or what seems wrong to them, or else you= won=E2=80=99t know what arguments and explanations to provide in more deta= il.

In a rational debate (or discussion) with one person who is good = at explicit arguments, and one who isn=E2=80=99t, the person who is good at= talking should be trying to explain lots of things and the other person sh= ould be giving lots of feedback about what he does and doesn=E2=80=99t have= objections to (intuitive or sometimes explicit). There should also be a lo= t of questions and hypothetical scenarios used, by both people, to get more= information about what intuitions want/say or not.

If you don=E2=80= =99t want to deal with intuitive disagreements, then there are hardly any l= iving people that you can rationally persuade. (And very likely you=E2=80= =99re not being fully honest with yourself and you too have intuitions that= you can=E2=80=99t articulate well.) Leave people alone or write impersonal= essays or books, but don=E2=80=99t expect them to change their minds and f= ollow your ideas when you won=E2=80=99t engage with their intuitions.

It=E2=80=99s actually fine and pleasant to deal with people who share intu= itions and give feedback on arguments and explanations. People don=E2= =80=99t need a bunch of skill at explicit arguments to have good discussion= s. They just need some honesty, some good will, and some willingness t= o communicate and share. The people who are difficult or unpleasant to deal= with are the ones who disagree and hide their disagreement. If people have= an intuitive disagreement and won=E2=80=99t talk about it, then it=E2=80= =99s very hard to make progress in discussion or debate. If people hide the= ir intuitions and focus only on making explicit arguments that aren=E2=80= =99t their real reasons (because they think explicit arguments are better a= nd more rational, so they=E2=80=99re trying to be a better, more rational p= erson than they actually are), then they=E2=80=99re being dishonest and sab= otaging discussion.

Mean People

A lot of p= eople who are pretty good at explicit arguments are pretty mean. Let=E2=80= =99s call them =E2=80=9Crationalists=E2=80=9D. They react negatively to int= uitive disagreement. They believe intuitions are bad or irrational. They tr= eat themselves that way and also treat others that way. Because this is wid= espread, most people are pretty reluctant to share their intuitions in deba= tes, especially when they don=E2=80=99t have prior friendship or at least r= apport with the person they=E2=80=99re talking with (and it=E2=80=99s even = worse in group settings when there are many different people who could pote= ntially say something mean).

However, it=E2=80=99s possible to stand = up to mean people and say things like =E2=80=9CI have an intuition that you= r idea is wrong. I don=E2=80=99t know how to articulate it. If you want me = to rationally change my mind, then we=E2=80=99ll have to work together to d= eal with this problem.=E2=80=9D And either they can participate in a friend= ly way or refuse. If they refuse, you=E2=80=99re right not to concede the d= ebate.

You can also avoid the mean rationalists without being traumat= ized and unwilling to talk about your intuitions with anyone. You can disen= gage when you run into them without feeling bad just because they=E2=80=99r= e a flawed person who doesn=E2=80=99t understand the topic of rationality a= nd intuition. You don=E2=80=99t have to blame yourself.

However you d= eal with others, it=E2=80=99s crucial not to adopt the rationalist view= yourself and then be mean to yourself. A lot of the meanness is somet= hing people do to themselves, not something that=E2=80=99s coming from othe= rs. If you were nice to yourself and self-confident, then other people woul= dn=E2=80=99t be very threatening (at least if they=E2=80=99re just stranger= s on internet forums who have no power over you, aren=E2=80=99t in your fam= ily, aren=E2=80=99t in your peer group, aren=E2=80=99t your boss, aren=E2= =80=99t your co-worker, etc.).

You need to be accepting about your ow= n intuitions instead of trying to force yourself to be more =E2=80=9Cration= al=E2=80=9D. Sure there are skills you can learn to be better at making exp= licit arguments, articulating ideas, etc. Those skills are useful to ration= ality. But they aren=E2=80=99t taught well in our society so it=E2=80=99s u= nderstandable not to be very good at them when the educational resources ar= e so bad. You can do fine (above average) in life without those skills. If = you care a lot you can read philosophy books, practice skills and take othe= r steps to learn. But don=E2=80=99t try to rush anything and accept ideas t= hat part of you disagrees with. And don=E2=80=99t look at yourself or your = ideas negatively when intuition is involved instead of English sentences. I= ntuitions are real, legitimate ideas that are part of you. They=E2=80=99re = harder to analyze and debate, but they=E2=80=99re just a normal type of ide= a and dealing with them is part of life.

Intuitions Are Useful

Even if you become one of the best philosoph= ers who is extremely good at articulating arguments, you=E2=80=99ll still h= ave and use intuitions. Intuitions are fundamentally important because our = subconscious mind has more computing power than our conscious mind. We need= to use our subconscious mind, not rely only on our conscious mind. Our sub= conscious is a huge resource. Things like intuitions and habits let us get = value from it. Lots of intuitions come from practice and automatization.

An ideal, perfect, rational philosopher would be able to turn any of hi= s intuitive ideas into an explicit idea when he needs to, but he=E2=80=99d = still use intuition in general. When is it worth the effort to convert intu= itions to words for conscious analysis? When there=E2=80=99s a problem to b= e solved involving the intuition, e.g. it disagrees with some idea that you= r conscious analysis says is good and important, so you want to investigate= the intuition so you can solve the problem causing the disagreement.

Some of your intuitions come from traditional ideas that you learned in ch= ildhood and didn=E2=80=99t do a bunch of critical thinking about before acc= epting. Some of those traditional ideas have mistakes in them. But, on aver= age, traditional ideas are right more than new ideas people just thought of= . In a conflict between an old tradition and a fresh idea, the tradition is= right more often. The fresh idea is either wrong overall or else has some = fixable flaw that the traditional intuition objects to.

Traditions ar= e right more often because they=E2=80=99ve been exposed to a ton of critica= l thinking in the past. People have already put a lot of effort into improv= ing them. And they=E2=80=99ve stood the test of time already without being = a total disaster. And there are far more ways to be wrong than right, so ra= ndom new ideas have a high chance to be wrong. Even non-random new ideas ar= e wrong pretty often. Being wrong fairly often is something that innovators= have to accept. (You don=E2=80=99t have to be wrong and confident= , or act on wrong ideas. But if you try to innovate, you will come= up with and consider lots of wrong ideas, and sometimes they=E2=80=99ll se= em good to you at first instead of you immediately recognizing that they=E2= =80=99re wrong.)

There=E2=80=99s room for improvement and progress wi= th rational, conscious analysis. We shouldn=E2=80=99t just stick to traditi= on. But rationality says to address conflicts between ideas (even = if an idea is intuitive instead of in clear words). Anyone who isn=E2=80=99= t doing that, and doesn=E2=80=99t treat intuitive ideas as legitimate thing= s to debate and discuss, isn=E2=80=99t really rational.

Discussion

=20

Gathering Data Points from Intuitions

Often, you can learn a lot about intuitions by asking questions (you can= your debate partner can both contribute to this). If the situation was X, = what side would your intuition take? What if the situation was Y? What abou= t Z? Keep checking a bunch of different scenarios and giving your intuitive= response to them and then you=E2=80=99ll be able to figure out in much mor= e detail what the intuition says and wants. With trial and error, you can f= igure out what issues make a key difference that determine what side the in= tuition takes and which issues don=E2=80=99t matter much. This can help nar= row down what your intuitive position is and enable discussing it and talki= ng about upsides and downsides of it, problems it has, etc. And it can help= you figure out the reason for the intuition.

Mental Models of Intuitions

You can think of an intuition like a mini person inside you with some id= eas and values, but who only communicates in limited ways, so you=E2=80=99r= e trying to figure out what they want and think. You can also think of an i= ntuition like an idea, just like any other, which has some knowledge and re= asoning =E2=80=93 which isn=E2=80=99t in words but could be in wor= ds and is the same knowledge whether it=E2=80=99s in words or not. So you c= an view an intuition as wanting, valuing, saying or thinking something, jus= t as you would talk about an explicit idea. That=E2=80=99s an approximation= because it=E2=80=99s people who value, want, say or think things. But it= =E2=80=99s understandable and we don=E2=80=99t have some well known and cle= arly better mental models to use. Our mental models tend to mix up people a= nd people=E2=80=99s ideas some, which makes sense because ideas are the mos= t important part of people.

Mean People

A lot of people who are pretty good at explicit arguments are pretty mea= n. Let=E2=80=99s call them =E2=80=9Crationalists=E2=80=9D. They react negat= ively to intuitive disagreement. They believe intuitions are bad or irratio= nal. They treat themselves that way and also treat others that way. Because= this is widespread, most people are pretty reluctant to share their intuit= ions in debates, especially when they don=E2=80=99t have prior friendship o= r at least rapport with the person they=E2=80=99re talking with (and it=E2= =80=99s even worse in group settings when there are many different people w= ho could potentially say something mean).

March 2023

MetaCreation

I=E2=80=99ve seen mention of the your win/win decisive solutions approac= h a few times (such as the podcast in How Better Debates Would Improve the World).

I think I an intuitive agreement with win/win decisive solutions, as yes= I think I=E2=80=99m sure I=E2=80=99ve come across something similar from A= yn Rand. I can=E2=80=99t remember exactly which of her books I=E2=80=99d ha= ve found it in and I think it=E2=80=99s something I=E2=80=99ve internalised= in the years since. I previously had a lot of reservations about using sta= tistics in truth decisions anyway (and generally think people are super bad= at interpreting the significance of statistics).

Because my prior understanding is intuitive it=E2=80=99s hard to say how= much of your idea is new to me here (and it kinda just fits in wi= th my intuition pretty effortlessly). I think the debate tables helped clar= ify the process to do it better (i.e. breaking a goal into absolut= e requirements and whether an idea solves those requirements). I think it= =E2=80=99s something I need to use in practise to understand better.

Anyway I thought I=E2=80=99d mention that as it might be weird not to say something about it since it=E2=80=99s come up multiple times.

I can=E2=80=99t say the same for Paths Forward. It seems good to me (I= =E2=80=99ve gone through the = curi.us articles) but I have some sort of intuitive resistance to it. I= read it and consciously think it=E2=80=99s good and I want to be rational,= so I think I should follow it but my subconscious doesn=E2=80=99t= want to, I guess I feel some sort of pressure/imposed obligation from it.<= /p>
I think maybe because it opens up a lot of uncertainty about how much ti= me I=E2=80=99d be committing to try to follow it. I don=E2=80=99t know how = to estimate how much time it would take up, so my subconscious is creating = some sort of disaster scenario where I=E2=80=99d have to spend all my time = on it and end up in an overwhelm situation again.

I think the root thing I don=E2=80=99t know is: What are the criteria fo= r ideas that I should have public Paths Forward for? I don=E2=80=99t think = it can be everything, everyone has tons of ideas about all sorts of stuff (= from subconscious ideas about the qualia they experience, to long complex e= conomic ideas). I don=E2=80=99t know what ideas I have that I should build = Paths Forward for.

From Curiosity =E2=80=93 Paths Forward Summary=

the way to deal with ALL ideas that disagree with you is you either 1) <= strong>write a refutation or, most of the time, 2) refer t= o a refutation already written by someone else or you. (you must t= ake responsibility for it. if it=E2=80=99s wrong you don=E2=80=99t= just blame the author, if you used it and it=E2=80=99s wrong, then you= were wrong).

I guess this is one kind of idea that should be included in a person=E2= =80=99s Paths Forwards but I don=E2=80=99t know about other ideas. Even thi= s I think needs some discretion with scale, some disagreements are very sma= ll/low-impact and could be a big burden to try to write up answers to all o= f them.

So I have some guesses:

Ideas that disagree with popular or high-impact ideas

Ideas that have significant impact (it could help a significant number = of people)

Ideas about something new, some new way something that could be done (m= aybe without clear benefit, but could be a good new way to look at some pro= blems)

2 replies

Don=E2=80=99t Suppress Your Intuition
Intuitions aren't irrational.

Elliot Temple

22 Sep 2022 =E2=80=A2 10 min read

Share

Elliot Temple

Gathering Data Points from Intuitions

Debates and Discussions Involving Intuitions

Mean People

Intuitions Are Useful

Discussion

Sign up for more like this.

Fire

Elliot

MetaCreation

Gathering Data Points from Intuitions

Mental Models of Intuitions

Mean People

Elliot

MetaCreation

MetaCreation

Elliot

MetaCreation

Elliot

Elliot

MetaCreation

Elliot

Elliot

MetaCreation

Elliot

MetaCreation