You can use logic to justify anything. That is its power, and its flaw.

Since last update I have been to the theatres again. This time to see that Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie movie Mr. and Mrs. Smith. After hearing nothing bad about it other than the fact that Pitt was starring opposite Jolie and gossips figured there was something beyond the silver screen going on and so fans of Jennifer Aniston may have decided to boycott it. But I'm just babbling.
Forsooth, it was a fairly good movie. It had its humour bits and good action; I enjoyed it.
***
The title of this post I first heard from an episode in Star Trek: Voyager. This is at a part where one of the Starfleet Captains (the highest ranking officer on a starship) finds her trust in her security officer heavily shaken.

Commander Tuvok:

Chief of Security Tuvok is an alien race physically characterized mostly by their pointy ears. More intriguing than that though is the very nature of the race itself. They are known for their ability to suppress emotion, showing no signs of pleasure or pain until stimulated at the extremes. Above all else they believe in the use of logic to govern their thoughts.
However, this is where the fatal flaw comes in this: logic is a process worked out by thoughts. Logic can never be flawed but the process by which it is attained can be.
Consider, for example, a war. Both sides of the war believe it is necessary to eliminate the other side. And when one decides to declare war on another it is seldom, if ever, done so lightly. Thus, this decision must have been arrived at through a process of logical elimination of alternatives. Both sides know that going to war will be costly no matter what happens. So why is war the only action left? Motive. Both sides are looking towards the world after the war. They don't know exactly what the world will be like after it but they have envisioned that it would be better (either for them or, pragmatically, for the world) if the other side were defeated.

***
A Mathematician, a Biologist and a Physicist are sitting in a street cafe watching people going in and coming out of the house on the other side of the street. First they see two people going into the house. Time passes. After a while they notice three persons coming out of the house.

The Physicist: "The measurement wasn't accurate".

The Biologist: "They have reproduced".

The Mathematician: "If now exactly 1 person enters the house then it will be empty again."
***
In the above story, all three people saw the exact same event yet have come to different conclusions of how. Their logic process was based on their thought processes. Discarding the conclusion of the mathematician, the statements made by the physicist and biologist could be true in any combination.

Therefore, since logical processes are governed by the thought processes of the person itself, what governs those processes is not logic in the first place, but something else that enters the loop. This is whatever influences the person's thought processes no matter how big or small. So I have come to one conclusion:

Logic is irrelevant.

Out.