Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article from Artificial Intuition Research (AIR), authored by Nikita and Sri Krish, explores how different disciplines approach human intuition. It examines perspectives from psychology, neuroscience, behavioural decision science, philosophy, and computer science, highlighting the distinct questions each field asks and the evidence it uses. The article discusses how implicit learning may shape intuitive impressions, how brain and bodily responses may accompany judgments, when heuristics can support effective decisions, and whether intuition can serve as evidence in philosophical reasoning. It also considers what computational systems can reproduce without assuming that similar outputs demonstrate the same underlying human processes. By comparing these perspectives, the article identifies connections between disciplines while highlighting the limits of what each approach can establish.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nikita et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: