It’s not impossible to train intuitive models. In most fields most experts have good intuitive models and I see no reason to believe your claim that strong analytical models are categorically better than strong intuitive one’s.
A common schema of learning would be to say that there’s:
unconscious incompetence,
conscious incompetence
conscious competence
unconscious competence
In that model unconscious competence is better than conscious competence.
● The determination of whether intuitive judgments can be trusted requires an examination of the environment in which the judgment is made and of the opportunity that the judge has had to learn the regularities of that environment.
● We describe task environments as “high-validity” if there are stable relationships between objectively identifiable cues and subsequent events or between cues and the outcomes of possible actions. Medicine and firefighting are practiced in environments of fairly high validity. In contrast, outcomes are effectively unpredictable in zero-validity environments. To a good approximation, predictions of the future value of individual stocks and long-term forecasts of political events are made in a zero-validity environment.
● Validity and uncertainty are not incompatible. Some environments are both highly valid and substantially uncertain. Poker and warfare are examples. The best moves in such situations reliably increase the potential for success.
● An environment of high validity is a necessary condition for the development of skilled intuitions. Other necessary conditions include adequate opportunities for learning the environment (prolonged practice and feedback that is both rapid and unequivocal). If an environment provides valid cues and good feedback, skill and expert intuition will eventually develop in individuals of sufficient talent.
It’s not impossible to train intuitive models. In most fields most experts have good intuitive models and I see no reason to believe your claim that strong analytical models are categorically better than strong intuitive one’s.
A common schema of learning would be to say that there’s:
unconscious incompetence,
conscious incompetence
conscious competence
unconscious competence
In that model unconscious competence is better than conscious competence.
Related paper: Conditions for Intuitive Expertise (Kahneman & Klein 2009).