“…because we live in a culture that doesn’t respect intuition, and has a very narrow definition of knowledge, we can get caught into the trap of that narrowness. Intuition is another kind of knowledge—deeply embodied. It is knowing just as much as intellectual knowing.”
Judy Luce, 1989
There is no doubt that the formation of identity is a creative process in which intuition plays a major role, although the question of how much one can rely on intuition underlies and fuels much of the concern regarding its functions as a valid source of self knowledge. Traditionally, western science has tended to stress the importance of empirical data and objective reality (sensation) on the one hand, and a systematic, impersonal method (thinking) on the other hand. As a result, feelings and intuition have been under-emphasized as a valid source of knowledge because they have been perceived as antithetical to the notion of science since they are vague, inherent, subjective qualities of thinking (Krieger, 1991; Jaggar, 1997; Shepherd, 1993).
In fact, “some extreme materialists see intuition as the foe of reason, or as a kind of quackery, and eschew as superstition anything they cannot measure with the five senses” (Shepherd, 1993: 221). This belief holds that “there is an authentic division between intuition and intelligence, where intellect wears the white hat and intuition the black hat, or no hat at all” (Laughlin, 1997:23).
Although there is no doubt that intuition occurs in all of us all of the time and is fundamental to the formation of identity, the experience of intuition is private, which makes it an unverifiable or ineffable kind of knowledge that can’t always be quantified and tested over time. The unpredictable, spontaneous, and subjective nature of intuition, coming as sudden flashes, can’t always be broken down into its component parts to be studied. In addition, just as an excessive reliance on too much rationalism can misconstrue reality, so can an excessive reliance on too much intuition. Like any quality carried to an extreme, intuition has a tendency to distort reality.
Carl Jung stressed that we must never passively accept the revelations of our intuition as absolute truth, but rather we must interact with them, raise questions, and present objections (Jung 1958). In other words, both reason and intuition have the tendency to distort reality when they are in isolated positions. Linda Shepherd writes, “neither sensation nor intuition are relational or evaluative functions. Sensation gives us information about the world and intuition reveals possibilities and provides insight about the nature of things. But neither can be isolated or substituted for the other because they work together as a whole” (1993: 213).
There is now evidence that modern society is moving beyond a purely either/or perspective on the issue of valid knowledge (Boucouvalas 1997). Researchers have asserted the indispensable unity between reason and intuition in all creative acts (Koestler 1959; Bastick 1982; Jung 1971). Some have even argued that science itself, with all its supervaluation of left brained deductive reasoning, could never have proceeded without the creativity of intuition (Bastick 1982; Jung 1971; Vaughan 1979). Carl Jung acknowledged the important functioning of intuition in the creative process as well as in the development of self. He maintained that:
It is almost absurd prejudice to suppose that existence can only be physical. As a matter of fact, the only form of existence of which we have immediate knowledge is the psychic. We might well say, on the contrary, that physical existence is mere inference, since we know matter in so far as we perceive psychic images mediated by the senses (Jung, 1958: 12).
Various feminist scholars have also acknowledged the value of intuition in the creative process, particularly its ability to provide a connected and holistic understanding of ourselves and the world around us (Chodorow, 2000; Luce, 1989; Kreiger, 1991). For example, Linda Shepherd writes, “the acceptance of intuition can give us greater access to information, augment the limited perspective of the five senses, and prompt us to transcend our linear view of time and space. Intuition can help bridge the boundaries that seem to separate us from others and from nature” (1993:223). In other words, when we deny the validity and importance of intuition, we are essentially denying our sense of relatedness to others, to nature, and to our inner selves.
In our age of diversity, it seems essential to transcend the either/or way of thinking that previously juxtaposed in an antithetical manner the rational and intuitive modes of knowing. Perhaps now with all the current research on intuition, outer knowing, with no need to further prove itself, can take its rightful place as a partner alongside inner knowing. Still, a total acceptance of the validity of psychic phenomena by the scientific community has yet to be established and will most likely require us to redefine and expand our current understanding of physics and psychology. The study of intuitive phenomena calls for a different approach to research that has yet to be determined. New methods need to be found that handle reports of subjective experiences to cope with the difficulty of replicating psychic phenomena and to deal with the uniqueness of individual experiences.
Exerpt from Thesis Research: Women Artists: The Transformation of Identity as Self Created and Socially Contructed, 2001.