Divya, Ansar, Shivani
Mar 7, 2017 - Mar 23, 2017
WOK Badge: Intuition
TOK Project: Paragraph
Regardless of experience, intuition can never be 100% accurate, and this is due to the fact that they are less reasoned than conscious thinking which is already flawed. In Blink, Malcolm Gladwell talks about a gambler looking at a game, calculating at his chances and making an intuitive decision. This gambler is experienced but he is not sure what to do in the situation and his intuition is entirely based on his previous experiences and his ability to analyze a situation. He makes borderline random decisions as he progresses. His problem is that as he continues to make poor intuitive decisions, his losses begin to compound and his intuitions become increasingly inaccurate. This causes him to lose a lot of money. This situation, known as Gambler’s Ruin, illustrates the fallibility of intuition. As it fails, it becomes weaker and weaker as a way of knowing. Unconscious decisions can never be accepted as assuredly accurate knowledge. If an experienced gambler can not trust his intuitions to be 100% accurate, it is clear that we can never trust any of our intuitions to be accurate. More importantly, this suggests that we can not trust our conscious reasoning, as it is simply intuition with a little expansion.
Intuition Journals: 3/7/17 - London
Today Ansar, Divya, Shivani, and I argued about Intuition. We ended with the definition that intuition is an unconscious analysis, and we decided that intuition was directly affected by experience, and indirectly affected by intelligence (the more intelligence, the more neural connections, the better your reasoning will be, sub-conscious or conscious). We talked about different ways to do our project. We want to do something where we interview people on the streets of London, so that we can get diversity. The project would be testing how experience affects intuition. We would ask them a set of questions, and then ask about their background afterwards. Hopefully we will find a correlation between the two.
Intuition Journals: 3/10/17 - London
We have heard that the project is being turned into a paragraph and so we have dropped the idea we had about asking random people on the street. Today we clarified that as a WOK, intuition can not come up with any information by itself. It is never 100% original since it relies on previous experience; however it does artificially create new knowledge. If knowledge is before a blank piece of paper, it colors it, and provides a use for it.
Intuition Elective Reading Journal: 3/21/17
For my elective reading I read Malcolm Gladwell's Blink. In Blink he talks about intuition at length, especially in the introduction. He gives an example of how, people can look at a married couple, and be able to tell whether or not they will be together 15 years later. This is entirely based off of intuition, and yet often it is correct. For some reason, humans have a sense that instinctively tells them if two people will be able to coexist together over a period of time. The evolutionary aspects are quite interesting. I think that it is a sense that has been improved as time has gone on. Being able to tell who will get along and who won't was most likely key in the days of tribes and nomads. Any small altercation could lead to the death of the tribe.
1. Will our intuition get better as we evolve?
2. Can intuition be trained to be as perfect as conscious thinking?
3. Is it possible to disable intuition?
Maurice Conti - The Incredible Invention of Intuitive AI
This would be an amazing video to watch with this section because it is entirely based around teaching intuition to robots. To first teach intuition, you must understand intuition. It shows that we are on the edge of completely understanding intuition. The video has several very interesting implications for not only the future of human society, but the reality of our intuition.