The study of "valid" reasoning. Validity is hard to define, for you have to go to metalogic for that, and it might be a problem that cannot be solved. But at least, if you can give good logic chains and evidence, I would say that it's indeed logical. Yet there is the danger of overthinking in an illogical world...
1. What strongly seems true can still be false so it’s natural skepticism.
2. Lack of evidence is not disproof, argumentum ad ignorantiam, so that’s why police still investigate cases that seem to be false. (And conversely, lack of disproofs is not evidence.)
3. Principle of falsification: You only need one counterargument to disprove an “always” argument.
4. Principle of truthification: You only need one argument to disprove a “never” argument
5. The more absurd something sounds, the less likely it is to be true: ECREE (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence): The strength of evidence must match the magnitude of a claim. Bayesian Inference
They feel attacked. And their brains go into danger mode. Also, logic takes time (Daniel Kahneman’s ideas), and in direct conversation, people feel like silence is creepy (time thinking). Even teachers misinterpret direct “feedback” as an attack…
1. Problem with no viable less-pain solution (eg education system)
2. Recursive loop with no good way to break it (eg lack of job experience -> no job -> repeat)
3. Antilogic (imagine a murderer murdering people for no (inferable) reason), which violates the predictive processing model.
Others aren’t always logical. Do people fall in love with logical people? Not more than people of love? Logic, like everything else, has its time and place. Some people, especially authority and bosses, hate being beaten by logic and will fight against logic with power, and I cannot take away their power. And then, if I use logic on some other people when they don't ask, obviously, they will not like it. Society expects humans, especially children, to be gullible, so people who aren’t like that may be scolded. I was one of the outliers, so I would say I had a lonely childhood, which made people misunderstand me as an arguer and cannot get along with others, etc.
This is where logic falls apart, where if everything needs a first cause, but God is said to be the first cause and needs nothing to exist in the first place, both contradict each other, and the human brain cannot find a solution.
Oftentimes one of the best applications of logic that few do. Used in A-level
business studies. The method is literally asking lots of: Because of
what/So what/And then what?
^Can this be infinite? Even I don't know. Ask epistemology.
Simply, people who refuse to change. People who simply believe they are right, always. People who do not understand logic, and feel attacked by logic. And people who use emotions excessively to justify their “perspectives”. And depending on characteristics, patience for others’ idiocy can be low.
Schopenhauer said not to argue with the "common" person, or the meaning of life (Absurdism), it’s a waste of energy.