As numerous studies have shown, people's "intuition" has a terrible track record, ranging from being statistically no better than a "wild-assed guess" to WORSE than statistical chance. When people use facts and reasoning, they get the answer right more often than not even in the absence of complete information. When they use intuition, a betting man will say they are wrong, a fact supported by actual statistical studies of "intuition". Intuition is highly over-rated and what liberals rely on absent their ability to reason.
One can assert intuition as a reason, but someone else could just as easily show that this fact alone indicates that they are wrong more likely than not. At best it makes for a highly unqualified argument. Like everyone else I have intuitive impulses as well, but I know better than to use them as a "reason" for anything.
Whether one has accurate data or not, when people use facts and reasoning without intuition... well that just doesn't happen. ;-) Also, "here 'you' go again..." making the same error that we've been talking about over and over and over again. Your statement presumes we may attain to some deific epistemological state where we may gain some set called "complete information."
Seems to me that in your post you are positing as if one uses intuition only (and wrongly) in the realm that is rightly that of reason. Of course one doesn't use intuition to calculate. (Though you do use it in order to let you know something about what your calculations are good for and not.) Here again, it's a matter of definition and semantics.
I'm not speaking of intuition as if it were making up the answer (like picking a horse to bet on out of the blue). I'm referring to intuition in its place, without which we have no basis at all for reason. I am speaking of getting to know reality... getting to know what truths are, by their natures and the imagery of the inner man (may be an objectionable term, how about 'less sensorily specified') first, what reason may properly be applied to, and how, and why.
You won't find many scientists devising experiments (thought experiments or physical ones) without intuition.
You can tell me facts and calculations without applying much intuition, but try telling me about the nature and behavior of functions in a system without applying your intuition.
Why do you have intuition, as well as reason? What is a productive interplay? If reason has a specialty which may be called logic, does intuition have a specialty? What is that? (Presuming that you believe in evolution theory and that each of the aspects of your behavior are fit for survival/reproduction.)