When you see these two words, your mind was flooded by images, memories, your body reacted, you recorded this, you became more alert and vigilant, you became much more able to recognize words like "smell" and "stick". You made up a story. In your mind, a causal relationship occurred. All these connections are systematic and reciprocal. Your disgust face caused others to make the same face. Association influences what you see, and now, you do not want a banana, huh? Similarly, if you make people smile when watching a cartoon, they find it funny.
I completely disagree for three reasons:
1. If intuition is only as good as the consistency of the environment (and it must be, since the experience of the intuit only exists in that environment) then, in a chaotic environment, a data driven approach is only as good as the data derived. But, in a chaotic environment, the data will not deliver any better concussions (correlations, causations) due to the chaotic nature of the environment. SO, that leaves us no better off - but worse because:
2. A data driven approach is based on data. This is obvious, but only the data which the observer decides to gather, is actually gathered. The data the observed did not decide to gather, is not gathered. This can lead to huge lack of data, and poor decisions.
3. Intuitive decision makers gather data they are not aware of, data with which they made no conscious decision to gather. If we hone our intuition, we have the possibility of gathering a lot more data, in much more complex or chaotic situations, and then understanding order, patterns etc.
So, here is what I think: There is an incredible hope for intuitive decision making. If we value that part of our brains, then cultivate it and become more aware of it, we have the possibility of far greater capacity than the statistical models. But to do this, we must trust in our own capacities.