Logic?

So I was having a great conversation the other night about logic as I posited that I don't particularly believe in it.  As I see it, "logic" really boils down to nothing more than having the answer already.  I think about so-called "logic puzzles", and, having read more than my fair share, would I be able to assert that I am more logical than someone who hasn't experienced as many?  For instance, a relatively well-known puzzle goes like this: you're in an otherwise empty room with a candle, a book of matches, and a box of small thumbtacks.  Your challenge is to light the candle in such a way that the flame is six feet off the ground.  Spoiler alert: empty the box of tacks and pin it to the wall.  From there, simply set the candle on the box.  Boom.  Now, I know that answer.  No, I did not initially come to that conclusion on my own, but I have it now, so who's to say any different?  So am I currently more "logical" than anyone else?  I would say no.

Now, through the course of the debate, some interesting counter-points were made that really got the ol' brain box working.  One such argument would be that logic, as it were, comes down to the ability to connect prior knowledge with new and novel challenges.  Touche.  However, I would say that that is the definition of intelligence - the ability to take previous education, experience, and background and reapply concepts in different situations to reach a conclusion which then gets assimilated into your working memory once more for future situations.  Now even this isn't my own thought.  Over the course of my own experience I've been fortunate enough to be exposed to a cornucopia of others and this paradigm comes from the works of Daniel Willingham (the article can be found here).  So again I would argue that much of what we "know" is a direct product of external stimuli.

A bit off topic I realize, but by now the conversation had shifted slightly this direction anyway so we ran with it.  So, I asked, what would the difference be between logic and intelligence? How does knowledge factor in? What about common sense? I would say that there wouldn't really be a difference per se, but that logic is a misused synonym for intelligence.  I've often thought about logic (and I would assume you have as well) as a black or white issue.  Either you're logical or you're not, whereas more and more we've broken down intelligence into different types (read more about multiple intelligence) and "objective" levels.  I think about Spock, often commenting whether or not a decision was logical, not whether or not it carried any level of intelligence.

So then where exactly are we?  Here I tried to summarize my argument about the whole ordeal: if intelligence is the product of years and years of external stimuli being processed and rearranged into new a different situations, and we want to say whether something is logical (or common sense) wouldn't that very logic be entirely subjective and different from one person to another?  And if it's subjective, how could we ever assume logic as a constant?  See, I received a very different educational experience than even those I went to school with. Just as they had a very different experience than me. I've had life experiences others haven't or experiences in a different order, crossing a bridge before or after others have long since been there, done that. And everyone, you included, have experienced things I never have, and often, never will.  So where does that take us?  And consider the ramifications of this interculturally and globally!

Here's another puzzle for you: In an otherwise empty, windowless room, with only one locked door in and out, you have a saw, a baseball bat, and a piano.  There exist three ways out of the room using only these materials (no, you can't break down the door or saw through it).  This one I won't spoil for you.

But if you figure out the three exits, consider if it's "logical" or simply a product of your experiences.

And whether or not it actually matters.