Methods of Intuition as a Function of Consciousness and Its Competencies in Science
- elenaburan
- 4 hours ago
- 9 min read
Introduction: Why We Need a “Methodology of Intuition” in Science
Debates about artificial intelligence, knowledge sovereignty and local language models are usually conducted from a rational angle: through standard methodologies, procedures, curricula. In practice, however, many of the deepest breakthroughs come from something else – from what we might call intuitive intelligence: the ability to see the whole picture, to recognize a paradox, and to fuse distant layers of knowledge into a new structure.
In this text I compare three sources:
a research paper by A. V. Melkikh on plant evolution and directed evolution, written from the perspective of a physicist who questions the standard Darwinian framework (Melkikh, 2023);
the textbook Campbell Biology (12th edition), which offers the classic Western “skeleton” of rational biology education (Urry et al., 2020);
the popular-science text “Plant Intelligence,” published by the Center for the Promotion of Science and aimed at a broad Serbian-speaking audience (Šemović, 2016).
The goal is not to declare one style “better”, but to show that intuitive intelligence has its own recognizable, rigorous methods – and that these methods can be described, taught, and used in the context.
1. Campbell Biology: the Rational Skeleton of Knowledge
The textbook Campbell Biology was created as a response to a specific challenge: how to organize an explosive amount of biological information into a framework students can actually follow. The authors explicitly refer to the Vision and Change initiative and state that the “hallmark features” of the book provide a conceptual framework aligned with the core competencies of modern biology (Urry et al., 2020).
A few key methodological moves:
Key Concepts. Each chapter is organized around 3–7 carefully chosen key concepts, supported by Concept Check questions, concise summaries and additional digital resources. This helps students distinguish “the forest from the trees”, that is, to keep the global picture in view instead of getting lost in details (Urry et al., 2020).
Integrating text and image. The authors explicitly claim that text and visuals are “equally important” for learning biology; they introduce Visual Overviews, Visualizing Figures, animations and tasks that require students to draw, annotate and graph data (Urry et al., 2020).
A standardized flow of understanding. The structure is linear: text, figure and question, a list of learning objectives, a sequence of concepts, review questions, summary tables, exercises and online quizzes (Urry et al., 2020).
Methodologically, this is a purely rational framework: information → concept → check → practice.
Strength: an enormous quantity of knowledge becomes manageable and surveyable.
Weakness: whatever does not fit into the existing theoretical framework (for example, the true depth of the problem of random mutations or the paradoxes of evolution) often ends up in the footnotes – or is not mentioned at all.
2. Melkikh: an Intuitive Audit of Rational Biology (Methods of Intuition)
A. V. Melkikh’s paper on plant evolution does not begin with extra details, but with unease. He starts from questions that in classic textbooks are at best only mentioned implicitly:
How do we explain the appearance of similar morphological forms and genetic patterns in distant plant groups (Vavilov’s law of homologous series)? (Melkikh, 2023)
How can random mutations search the space of possible genomes when the number of combinations is on the order of 4^N and practically untraversable? (Melkikh, 2023)
How do we account for very rapid adaptations (for example, urban insect populations) within the standard Darwinian picture of random mutations + selection? (Melkikh, 2023)
Already in the introduction Melkikh stresses that one of the “most striking features is innate complexity,” and that this very complexity challenges existing evolutionary theories (Melkikh, 2023).
2.1. Methods of Intuitive Intelligence in This Paper
If we try to follow what, exactly, Melkikh’s mind is doing, we can identify several methodological moves characteristic of a mature intuitive intellect:
The method of paradox. Instead of smoothing over contradictions, he sharpens them to the limit. In the case of genomes, the paradox is:
– either mutations are truly random, in which case searching the 4^N space of variants becomes physically impossible within the lifetime of the Universe (Melkikh, 2023);
– or there is some a priori guidance (block-modular organization, “hot spot” regions, DNA repair systems), which no longer belongs to pure randomness (Melkikh, 2023).
The intuitive method here is not “a feeling,” but the construction of a logical knot from which there is no elegant escape without a change of paradigm.
Using laws and “periodic systems.” Melkikh returns to Vavilov’s law of homologous series: series of similar variants in related species resemble a periodic table – there is order, and missing elements can be predicted. He explicitly states that these patterns “are not compatible with the Darwinian paradigm” and point to some process that channels variability (Melkikh, 2023).
The method here is the search for a deep analogy (periodic table – variability of living forms) and treating that analogy not as decoration but as a working hypothesis.
An informational–physical cut. Melkikh introduces Kolmogorov’s and Chaitin’s notions of program complexity as a measure of an organism’s structure, and asks: how large a “program” is needed for a sequoia, for a 160-Gbp fern genome, and so on (Melkikh, 2023)? This is a typical move of intuitive intelligence: translating a problem from one domain (botany) into a completely different one (information theory) in order to reveal new constraints.
Connecting levels – from genes to behavior. In his conclusion he claims that “the development of new plant species is a directed process” and proposes the notion of “evolution–behavior”: both evolution and behavior are programmed processes involving epigenetic mechanisms (Melkikh, 2023).
This is vertical integration of levels: mutation → genome → morphogenesis → behavior → “evolution–behavior” as a unified concept.
Clearly naming the limits of a theory. Melkikh openly states that “the role of selection, random mutations and genetic drift is secondary” to directed processes, and calls for a revision of the basic assumptions of evolutionary theory (Melkikh, 2023).
In other words, instead of being satisfied with the “program” of Vision and Change, he uses the vision of the whole large puzzle and reveals the missing pieces of the program, showing that the program is largely a façade.
This is, in essence, the methodology of a mature intuitive intellect: not just the feeling that something is “off,” but the construction of a new logical skeleton through paradoxes, high-resolution analogies and the bridging of disciplines.
3. The Serbian Text “Plant Intelligence”: Intuition Without an Explicit Method
The popular-science text by the Center for the Promotion of Science on the exhibition “Plant Intelligence” begins in a very different way: visually, sensorially, almost poetically. Plants are described as beings that make up “99 percent of the planet’s biomass” and without which life on land “would not be possible”.
The author builds a series of intuitively powerful analogies:
plants “have no muscles, but they have the same filaments as our biceps” (Lecture; Šemović, 2016);
“they have no nerves, but electrical signals transmit information through different vessels” (Lecture; Šemović, 2016);
plants “communicate with each other” and “have senses” (Lecture; Šemović, 2016).
This is a purely intuitive register:
– approaching the topic through analogies with the human body,
– appealing to feelings and wonder,– opening questions (“how does a plant see, hear, feel touch?”) without entering a deep theoretical discussion (Lecture; Šemović, 2016).
What do we see here?
The power of narrative. The text breaks through the reader’s indifference; plants are no longer “background,” but actors with their own senses and signals.
A metaphorical rather than formal style. Instead of definitions and theorems, we get images, comparisons, questions.
An implicit methodology. The author leads the reader from “why should we even care about plants?” to “plants shape the atmosphere and conditions for life” – that is an argumentative structure, but it is not explicitly presented as a framework (Lecture; Šemović, 2016).
In other words, the Šemović's text already carries intuitive energy, but his method remains unspoken. It sparks interest, yet does not immediately offer a tool to move from interest to one’s own research questions, models, or critique of existing biology.
4. Three Methodological Profiles – Where Is the Difference?
Now we can look at them side by side:
Campbell Biology – the Rational Skeleton
Goal: to organize existing knowledge into a stable framework for learning.
Method: key concepts, check questions, visual resources, clear chapter structure.
Strength: reliability, clarity, standardization.
Limitation: little room for paradoxes, critique and alternative paradigms; the student learns “how to apply the existing theory,” but less “how to question it.”
Melkikh – an Intuitive Audit of Rational Biology
Goal: to show that the existing framework (random mutations + selection) is not sufficient to explain real data on plant evolution.
Method:
exposing paradoxes (genome complexity, speed of adaptation, parallelisms);
using laws (Vavilov) and deep analogies (periodic table – series of variants);
introducing informational and systemic concepts (Kolmogorov, Chaitin, tectology);
vertically connecting levels (from mutation to “evolution–behavior”).
Strength: opens space for a new paradigm; legitimizes intuitive doubts once they are well formalized.
Limitation: The text is extremely easy and pleasant to read for those with intuitive intelligence, like Tesla’s. But a rational intellect will feel a strong urge to tear this text apart, as has always happened throughout history, because it offers a clear picture of the world and of the central life process without trying to stop it, break it into tiny parts – as rational analysts typically do – to dissect and examine its inner workings at every step, like in a forensic pathology lab.
“Plant Intelligence” – Intuitive Narrative Without a Skeleton
Goal: to awaken interest and wonder, to bring the world of plants closer to the general public.
Method: images, comparisons, questions, stressing the importance of plants for life and the atmosphere.
Strength: a powerful entry point for intuitive intelligence; the reader feels that there is something big here.
Limitation: it does not articulate a clear research question, does not map out paradoxes, and does not enter into a debate with the existing theoretical framework.
5. How to Extract “Methods of Intuitive Intelligence” for the Context
If we want scientific and educational practice to develop a serious methodology of intuitive intelligence – methods of intuition – we can learn directly from Melkikh and apply this to texts like the Elementarijum pieces (Lecture; Šemović, 2016).
5.1. Start from a Paradox, Not from a Definition
Instead of merely explaining “how a plant sees,” we could:
explicitly formulate a paradox: “If plants do not have a nervous system like ours, how do they process information and make decisions that appear coordinated and long-term?”
show where this paradox clashes with existing models (for example, with the reduction of intelligence to the brain and neurons alone).
This is exactly the move Melkikh makes with genomes and Vavilov’s series.
5.2. Introduce “Local Laws” and Patterns
In the Serbian text (Lecture; Šemović, 2016) on plants there is already an intuitive claim: plants shape the atmosphere and conditions for the life of other organisms.
A step further would be to:
name a potential “law” or pattern (for instance, a law of plant co-evolution with the atmosphere);
formulate it as a hypothesis to be tested;
connect it with existing work on plant networks, symbiosis, biosemiotics.
This is an intuitive yet thoroughly scientific method: extracting a hypothesis from a metaphor.
5.3. Translation Between Disciplines
Melkikh translates botany into the language of information theory and physics.
In the Serbian context (Lecture; Šemović, 2016) we can:
translate the story of “plant senses” into the language of signals, noise and detection thresholds;
translate narratives about “plant communication” into the language of networks, information flow and energetic constraints.
Here intuitive intelligence functions as a translator between layers – but that translation can be formalized.
5.4. Mapping the Four Functions of Consciousness in a Text
If we take the IPER typology (Intuitivus – Rationalis – Ethicus – Practicus) as a tool, we can “color” each text by function:
Campbell: dominant Rationalis, secondary Practicus (tasks, applications), weak Intuitivus (few paradoxes), weakly explicit Ethicus.
Melkikh: strong Intuitivus (paradoxes, deep analogies), solid Rationalis (mathematical and informational arguments) – N. Tesla had this combination; implicit Ethicus (critique of reductionism), latent Practicus (implications for experiments and modeling).
Šemović and Elementarijum: strong Intuitivus (images, metaphors), solid Ethicus (care for nature and atmosphere) – M. Pupin had this combination (IPER); weak Rationalis (little formal critique of theories), Practicus limited to popular workshops.
This is already a method of intuitive intelligence: to recognize which functions are at work and which are suppressed, and to reconstruct the text so that all four come into play.
Conclusion: From Intuition as “Decoration” to Intuition as Method
In comparing these three sources we see three positions of intuition:
in Campbell Biology, intuition is mainly a prior phase: the authors used intuition to design the book, but the student receives a finished rational framework;
in Melkikh’s work, intuition is explicitly present in the form of methods: paradoxes, analogies, crossing disciplinary boundaries, consciously questioning dogmas;
in the Serbian text (Lecture; Šemović, 2016) on “plant intelligence,” intuition appears as a narrative style, but it is not elevated to the level of a formal research instrument.
The message of this text is simple and, at the same time, political at the level of science:
Intuitive intelligence is not “less scientific”; it is a different way of organizing knowledge. Its methods – working with paradoxes, translating between disciplines, constructing new “periodic systems” – already exist in works like Melkikh’s. We simply need to name them, develop them and build them into Serbian texts, textbooks and projects.
If the scientific and educational space continues to adopt only the rational skeleton of Western methodologies, intuition will remain in the realm of “feeling” and “identity”, but not in the realm of grants, projects and models. If, on the contrary, we follow the path suggested by both Melkikh and the IPER tables, intuition can become a second pillar of science, equal to rationality – with its own methods, quality indicators and language.
This is precisely the space in which we can work:
to select texts (on AI, biology, economics),
to demonstrate on them a before/after audit from the standpoint of intuitive intelligence,
and to turn that into a portfolio for clients, for grants, and for national models that will not be mere copies of someone else’s skeletons.
_______
Melkikh, A. V. (2023). Progressive evolution of plants: A critical review. Biosystems, 104975. doi.org , below - in English pdf
Predavanje Danijela Šemovica. Elementarijum, portal Centra za promociju nauke https://elementarium.cpn.rs/videos/predavanje-danijela-semovica/?script=lat&utm_source=chatgpt.com
Šemovic, D. (2016). Šta biljka zna: vodič kroz svet čula. Centar za promociju nauke
Urry, L. A., Cain, M. L., Wasserman, S. A., Minorsky, P. V., & Orr, R. B. (2020). Campbell Biology (12th ed.). Pearson.