A new popular book argues that intuition — the quick, bodily sense that “something will happen” — is not mystical but a form of biological prediction: the body feels small, fast-changing signals that precede an external event and so seems to “see” the future. The claim sits at the crossroads of mainstream neuroscience (predictive brain models and interoception), contentious laboratory work on physiological “presentiment,” and centuries of cultural advice to “listen to your body.” For Thai readers wondering whether to trust a flutter in the stomach or a sudden sense of dread, the short answer is: sometimes your body gives useful advance information, but the science is complex and contested, and anxiety can mimic intuition. (The Times overview of the book and its thesis is the immediate media prompt for renewed interest) (How your body predicts the future — The Times).
The idea matters because it promises practical benefits: better decision-making, earlier danger detection, and improved mental health if people learn to separate helpful bodily signals from worry. Neuroscientists describe how the brain constantly predicts incoming sensations, including internal bodily states, in order to regulate temperature, heart rate and attention; clinicians worry that heightened “body-watching” can amplify anxiety. Thailand’s public-health planners, school counsellors and families will want to know when to teach mindful body-awareness and when to refer people for treatment. This article examines the science behind the book’s claim, the lab findings that have provoked lively debate, expert perspectives, and practical guidance for Thai readers on using body-based signals safely.
Modern neuroscience offers a clear framework for why the body can feel like it predicts the near future. The brain is not a passive receiver of sensory data; it constantly generates predictions about incoming signals and updates those forecasts when surprises arrive. That predictive processing model has been extended to interoception — the sensing of internal bodily states — so that emotions and urges can be seen as the brain’s best guesses about bodily needs and what will happen next. Leading accounts call this “interoceptive inference” or “active interoceptive inference,” and argue it helps explain why a gut feeling can precede and shape behaviour (Active interoceptive inference and the emotional brain).
A parallel strand of research tests a more startling claim: that physiological signals sometimes change moments before a genuinely random, unexpected external event — a phenomenon labelled “presentiment” or predictive anticipatory activity (PAA). Meta-analyses of these lab studies report small but statistically significant pre-stimulus differences in skin conductance, heart rate, pupil size and EEG patterns before emotionally arousing stimuli compared with neutral ones. Early pooled analyses concluded there was an effect worth studying further (Predictive physiological anticipation — meta-analysis; original Frontiers review) and later systematic updates found evidence across a broader set of studies (Predictive physiological anticipatory activity — update).
Not all scientists accept these results as evidence that the body literally reaches forward in time. Critics point to methodological risks: small effect sizes, the possibility of selective reporting (file-drawer bias), multiple analytic choices that can inflate false positives, and challenges in ruling out subtle cueing or expectation effects. Independent critical reviews concluded that while some experiments were intriguing, the field needs more pre-registered, large-sample confirmatory trials with strict controls to rule out artefacts (Predicting the unpredictable — critical analysis). Worries about undisclosed researcher flexibility have been highlighted across psychology and neuroscience and are not unique to presentiment research (False-positive psychology).
Experts who study interoception and emotion make a useful distinction that helps Thai readers decide when bodily signals are likely to be reliable. If a bodily change tracks an identifiable pattern — the smell of smoke, a rising heart rate when crossing a narrow bridge, or an instinct to withdraw from an unsafe person — it is plausible the brain is combining past experience with faint sensory or internal cues to make a fast, adaptive prediction. This is the evidence-based form of intuition emphasised in accounts of constructed emotion and predictive processing (Theory of constructed emotion). By contrast, spontaneous physiological blips that seem to forecast a random image in a laboratory, or persistent body-worrying that amplifies catastrophising, fall into two different categories: the former is controversial and unproven as a general ability; the latter is a core symptom of anxiety disorders and requires clinical care (Interoception and mental health: a roadmap).
Direct quotes from researchers capture both excitement and caution. One influential theorist writes that bodily signals form part of the brain’s internal model and thus shape perception and emotion, inviting us to “listen to the body as part of the brain’s predictive machinery” (Active interoceptive inference and the emotional brain). By contrast, authors of critical reviews stress that presentiment studies “need pre-registered confirmatory studies” to dispel concerns about analytic flexibility and publication bias (Predicting the unpredictable — critical analysis).
What does this mean for Thailand? First, bodily awareness is already part of Thai cultural life. Buddhist mindfulness practices taught in temples and schools encourage noticing breath, posture and sensations — skills that map neatly onto evidence-based interoceptive training used in psychotherapy and stress reduction. Family-centred care and respect for elders also mean that embodied signals reported by relatives are often acted on quickly; harnessing that cultural strength could improve early detection of illness if caregivers learn to separate adaptive signals from worry. At the population level, Thailand faces significant mental-health challenges: recent analyses show anxiety disorders are among the most prevalent mental-health problems in the country and region, with younger adults and adolescents particularly affected (Spatiotemporal patterns of mental disorders in Thailand; UNICEF country report). This raises the risk that normal bodily sensations will be misread as ominous, fuelling distress rather than helpful action (Thailand Country Report on Mental Health — UNICEF).
Thailand’s health system can take practical steps that match the science. Primary-care clinics, school health programs, and community health volunteers can teach straightforward interoceptive skills: a simple daily body scan, mindful breathing for 10 minutes, and learning to label sensations (tight chest, flutter, warmth) without immediately interpreting them as catastrophe. Psychologists and psychiatrists can add short interoceptive training modules to cognitive-behavioural therapy for anxiety, as evidence shows better interoceptive accuracy can reduce panic and improve emotion regulation (Interoception and mental health: a roadmap). At the same time, health educators should warn that not every premonition is predictive; persistent or disabling bodily worry needs professional assessment, and decisions with large consequences should not rely solely on a fleeting gut feeling. The World Health Organization recommends integrating mental-health literacy into schools, which is an obvious vehicle for teaching healthy body-awareness alongside stress reduction (WHO — Mental health).
There is relevant historical and cultural context in Thailand that shapes how such a message will be received. Thai Buddhism and traditional medicine endorse mindfulness and body observation as pathways to insight; monks and community healers have long advised attending to bodily signs. That heritage can make Thai audiences receptive to interventions that frame interoceptive training as continuity with tradition rather than foreign medicalisation. At the same time, cultural respect for authority can slow public debate about controversial scientific claims such as presentiment; Thai readers benefit from balanced, cautious reporting rather than grand promises that the body can “see the future.” Families, who often make health decisions collectively, should be urged to use embodied signals as one input among many, not as sole proof of danger or destiny.
Looking ahead, scientific work will push both directions. On the mainstream side, neuroscience will continue refining models of how predictions about internal states shape perception and choice, and clinical trials will test whether interoceptive training reduces anxiety in schools and hospitals. On the fringe, presentiment researchers are responding to methodological critiques by running pre-registered single-trial experiments, using true randomization and larger samples to test whether anticipatory physiological signals can be reliably used to predict outcomes (Predictive physiological anticipatory activity — update). If robust evidence accumulates that physiological markers can forecast specific events even a few seconds ahead in tightly controlled settings, it will demand a rethinking of causal assumptions in biology and physics; until then, cautious curiosity is the reasonable stance (Predicting the unpredictable — critical analysis).
For Thai communities and health services, here are practical, evidence-aligned recommendations. First, encourage mindful body-awareness as a public-health skill: short, culturally adapted exercises taught in schools, temples and primary clinics can improve emotional regulation and reduce stress. Second, educate people about the difference between adaptive intuition (fast predictions based on weak cues) and pathological anxiety (chronic hypervigilance and catastrophic interpretation); use simple screening tools in primary care to triage people who need specialist help. Third, support pre-registered, locally run research collaborations between Thai universities and international labs to test interoceptive training in Thai classrooms and hospitals; local evidence will make policy uptake easier. Fourth, avoid sensational claims in public messaging — do not present intuition as a reliable method for high-stakes decisions like medical treatment or financial investments. Finally, integrate traditional practices such as breath-focused meditation with modern psychotherapies to make interventions culturally resonant and practical for families. These steps respect Thai cultural values — mindfulness, family care and deference to trusted authorities — while protecting people from unproven claims.
The new book and accompanying media coverage have revived an old debate: is intuition an ancient biological skill we should trust, or a seductive idea that outpaces the evidence? Neuroscience gives strong reasons to take bodily signals seriously when they come from patterns the brain can plausibly predict. Laboratory presentiment studies raise provocative findings that deserve rigorous follow-up, but methodological concerns mean they cannot yet be the basis for public-health policy. For Thai readers, the balanced takeaway is to learn to notice the body without being ruled by it. Use body-based awareness to improve attention, safety and emotional balance; when sensations become chronic, distressing or drive harmful decisions, seek psychological or medical help rather than assuming the body is delivering an infallible prophecy.
Tags: #intuition #interoception #predictiveprocessing #mentalhealth #Thailand #healthnews #mindfulness #psychology
(How your body predicts the future — The Times)(https://www.thetimes.com/life-style/health-fitness/article/intuition-meaning-anxiety-see-the-future-j3sf6t52b)
(Active interoceptive inference and the emotional brain)(https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5062097/)
(Theory of constructed emotion: an active inference account)(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5390700/)
(Predictive physiological anticipation preceding seemingly unpredictable stimuli: A Meta-Analysis)(https://escholarship.org/uc/item/22b0b1js)
(Predictive physiological anticipatory activity — An update)(https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6124390/)
(Predicting the unpredictable: critical analysis and practical implications of predictive anticipatory activity)(https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3971164/)
(False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant)(https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22006061/)
(Interoception and Mental Health: A Roadmap)(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6054486/)
(Spatiotemporal patterns and clustering of mental disorders in Thailand)(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11080131/)
(WHO — Mental health)(https://www.who.int/health-topics/mental-health)