Our intuitions are not to be trusted, we are told. Only reason can be trusted, we are told.
I have no idea what this intuition-free process of reasoning is like, to be honest.
It occurred to me this evening that this is likely how I function intellectually:
1.) I am motivated by and driven by deep intuitions and inspirations, probably sub-consciously most of the time.
2.) As I act on those intuitions and inspirations through such activities as finding reading materials, asking questions, formulating theories, having discussions with others, etc., reason and logic act as a filter.
In other words, reason and logic are not how I seek and find the truth. Rather, they are filters employed to make truth/reality--including the truth/reality of intuitions/inspirations--more intelligible and manageable.
It seems to me that formal science is probably the same way. Scientists may not call it intuitions or inspirations--they may call it something else, such as a hunches--but the same thing is probably going on.
I think that we need to clarify what reason and logic are and their role in the process of seeking and discovering the truth.
It seems to me that truth/reality is within us rather than something external. We use the external to confirm what is within us. Reason in general and reason according to certain rules (logic) are simply tools employed in that process and should not be mistake for truth/reality itself.
If I am correct, then, uh, reason would seem to dictate that truth/reality can be known through non-rational and probably extra-rational means.
I have no idea what this intuition-free process of reasoning is like, to be honest.
It occurred to me this evening that this is likely how I function intellectually:
1.) I am motivated by and driven by deep intuitions and inspirations, probably sub-consciously most of the time.
2.) As I act on those intuitions and inspirations through such activities as finding reading materials, asking questions, formulating theories, having discussions with others, etc., reason and logic act as a filter.
In other words, reason and logic are not how I seek and find the truth. Rather, they are filters employed to make truth/reality--including the truth/reality of intuitions/inspirations--more intelligible and manageable.
It seems to me that formal science is probably the same way. Scientists may not call it intuitions or inspirations--they may call it something else, such as a hunches--but the same thing is probably going on.
I think that we need to clarify what reason and logic are and their role in the process of seeking and discovering the truth.
It seems to me that truth/reality is within us rather than something external. We use the external to confirm what is within us. Reason in general and reason according to certain rules (logic) are simply tools employed in that process and should not be mistake for truth/reality itself.
If I am correct, then, uh, reason would seem to dictate that truth/reality can be known through non-rational and probably extra-rational means.