The logical trap

In interpersonal, social, and even organizational matters, the charms of taking things to their logical conclusion are often undeniably commanding. The rational hope - that all haze will pave the way for structure and clarity if only the conclusions are reached through a thorough logical process - that chances of remorse in future would be minimised if only the decisions being taken today were logically sound - has its allure, more so when there is a past of unresolved self-doubt. The cathartic effect of regained self-confidence amplifies the hope of taking in the reins of a discourse, while distancing the option of "letting it be" as a remnant of a darker, helpless past. A logical discourse promises that even if the outcomes happen to be not favourable, the fact, that we had made conscious effort to do right in the given time and situation, would prove to be enough consolation to soothe our heart and heal our soul.

Logic forms the foundation of rational aspects of human psyche, indentity and behaviour. While being noble in its intent, and a powerful tool to arrive at truth, the tool of logic requires to be accessorised with patience, observation, introspection - and deployed over time, refined with incremental feedbacks. Human beings are irrational beings, driven by unmet, irrational needs largely lying in one's subconscious psyche. Disguised in rationality, and projecting itself as free from malice of greed, fear, or bias, logic can mislead the direction of one's assessment by handing over the reins of its discourse to unacknowledged emotional undertones lying six feet under one's realm of awareness.

When the violation of interpersonal boundaries causes pain, logic often steps in as a righteous way to establish a just agreement—yet it is not without risk. The more "logical" party risks turning the argument into a defensive exercise in self-righteousness. Logicality drifts one away from reasonability, drifting the individual towards an isolated island of their logics, misunderstood by others and devoid of the shared emotional warmth characteristic of an enriched life. What should be a tool for mutual exploration and communication, takes one towards a more internally referenced life - which might be morally well-placed, yet lonely. Defence of one's self should be based on a multimodal structure comprising of shared emotional warmth, care, love - that nurture a degree of emotional safety which makes the need for nuclear logics a matter of sheer paranoia.

Sound logic and well-placed reasoning can support one’s ego defences during turmoil, especially when a caring environment is missing and survival of the individuality requires a path not taken. While the internal moral compass and soul conviction are emphasised by great leaders like Mahatma Gandhi ("On the path of truth, one often has to walk alone.")  and Rabindra Nath Tagore ("Ekla cholo re"), the self-righteousness derived from such convictions must be exercised with caution. Human life should have sharing, and connection, for what is the worth of winning a point and losing the connection. Reducing the use of "logical nukes" may make one more vulnerable, yet shared vulnerabilities are what foster human connection. A balanced approach—one that supports emotional safety without depriving oneself of the pleasures of human intimacy and the fun of being light-heartedly illogical, is what we should aspire to inculcate into our lives.