For experts with tens of thousands of hours experience in a specialised field, with 40 years of case studies to extrapolate from?

Let's cast it in more relatable terms:

Such a person is, an enormous collection of data.

The day will come... soon, when people who "believe in technology" (in the very strong sense) will see no problem putting absolute trust in a neural network trained on exactly that same corpus of data.

A neural network is of course, a magnificent black box statistics machine.

And what are statistics machines trained on? Numbers. But they process and relate to them in a fuzzy way.

What is a spreadsheet and data analytics suite? Numbers.

Now your human specialist is going to outperform the numbers machine every time. But the human can often not introspect their ineffable knowledge (most expert knowledge is like that; which is why we developed the entire filed of expert systems to make it legible)

So if we choose to call such knowledge "feelings" of "guesswork" we're making a silly mistake. What does that even mean?

Neither can the neural network introspect. But we choose to label that ineffable knowledge as "calculation".

And so you invoke the magical properties of "NUmbers!" (did you mean real or imaginary ones :)

You see the error we fall into, giving two different labels to the same process only because of what hardware they execute on?

What I'd really like to talk about is the logical process of discovery called "abduction", but I fear I am rambling already :)