Abstract: The paper examines the issues of intuition in investigative practice. Relying on the positions of prominent forensic scientists, the importance of this heuristic mechanism for overcoming deadlocks caused not only by a shortage of information, but also by its overabundance is substantiated. The author suggests mechanisms for the development of intuition, the main of which is called the expansion of erudition, the accumulation of a large number of background knowledge. The second part of the article discusses the problems of artificial intelligence. Firstly, the topic of its potential to replace a person is covered. Secondly, the position existing in science is refuted, according to which the work of artificial neural networks is characterized as intuitive. Based on the analysis of practical examples and the synthesis of various scientific positions, the author formulated the following conclusions: 1. The intuitive decisions based on the probabilistic assumption assist the investigator in choosing specific investigative actions or tactics for their conduct. 2. Intuition is best developed among investigators with average work experience and broad erudition. 3. Intuition can and should be developed, mainly by expanding erudition, accumulating background experience. 4. The work of artificial neural networks cannot be called completely intuitive, since they act according to a given algorithm, even if generating a solution that is not accessible to human perception, whereas intuition is a creative process that goes beyond standard models. 5. To date, there is only a weak artificial intelligence, which is able to cover only situations of an overabundance of information, but not its deficit, although the latter very often require an appeal to intuition. 6. Intuition is a competitive advantage of humans over artificial intelligence, allowing our species to think more broadly, more versatile.