I do indeed use intuition to move more quickly in my understandings, and this partly explains why people sometimes have problems following my logic. Even if they look at the same information, they may not follow where I go with it.

Yet as I said, it is important to then see if the intuitive leap brought you somewhere useful. I'm not suggesting that one rely on intuition and abandon reason. Nor is the intuition 'needed'. It is merely convenient. It speeds things up.

For example, with 9/11 some people will not entertain the idea because they can't believe it (it seems illogical). They won't walk with you. They refuse to budge. Their mind is closed - they 'know it all'. A leap of intuition or faith might say, "Okay, let's pretend the official story is hoaxed. What can we now see?" By walking the path, you see the issue from a new perspective. You drop the denial and suspend disbelief long enough to be exposed to other views. It is the people who have been willing to do this who see through the hoax.

Then you can decide which view brought you the most insight, explained the available facts the best, etc. There need be no faith at this point - just direct logic and reason.

As bns observed, everyone has assumptions, and often they don't see them. (For example, "Elected officials would never orchestrate 9/11.") Intuitive leaps help you to see your assumptions, and try different ones.

QM is a model. What exists of the model is well understood. What it is modeling is not. As for electricity, I'll stand by my statement that it is not well understood. Models of it achieve various goals, but the underlying 'why does it work this way' is unclear. And it must be, because QM is incomplete.