Logic vs Emotions: A False Divide

In our world, we’re told to “stay logical” or “don’t get emotional,” as if the two can’t exist together. But I believe that divide is false.

Premise 1

The Divide

How often do we hear things like “you’re being too emotional” or “be logical about it”? Being logical and being emotional are often treated as opposites. As if logic and emotion live on two different planets. The world loves to divide things: mind vs. body, good vs. bad, logic vs. emotion. We’re told logic is steady ground and emotion is quicksand, logic is seen as clear, rational, dependable. Whereas emotion is seen as messy, irrational, unreliable. But what if emotion isn’t the opposite of logic at all? What if every feeling already carries its own reasoning inside it?

To understand the logic behind the point I'm making, it can perhaps be helpful to look at the definition of "logic" first.

Logic = the system or structure of reasoning that shows how a conclusion follows from a set of premises.

In philosophy, logic is the study of valid reasoning; what makes an argument internally consistent. When we say something is “logical” in everyday use, we usually mean it makes sense.

It's important to notice that logic doesn’t guarantee the conclusion is true in the external world, only that it follows coherently from the starting point. Notice how the definition itself leans on the idea of a “set of premises.” Logic isn’t some cosmic law that guarantees universal truth, it’s more like a referee. It doesn’t care if your premises are about gravity or unicorns; it only cares whether your conclusion follows cleanly from them. In other words, logic tells you when your reasoning is valid, not whether your starting point is true.

To better illustrate what I'm trying to express, let's use two examples of reasoning

Example:

• Premise: All roses are flowers.

• Premise: This is a rose.

• Conclusion: Therefore, this is a flower.

Now let's try a sillier example.

Example:

• Premise: All unicorns are accountants.

• Premise: Steve is a unicorn.

• Conclusion: Steve is an accountant.

  
  

This is airtight in logic land, but Steve still doesn’t exist. In other words, the reasoning is flawless, but the reality is nonsense.

Logic isn’t some cosmic law that guarantees universal truth, it’s more like a referee.

The Logic of Emotions

So how does this tie in with emotions? I'm saying that just like logic, emotions always make sense when you understand their premises, emotions and logic aren't the opposite, I believe that emotions absolutely have logic: if we understand the premises (past experiences, trauma, needs, fears, values), the emotional reaction makes perfect sense. The premises aren’t always obvious. They might be buried in past experiences, trauma, or unmet needs, but the emotional reaction follows from them as cleanly as “roses are flowers.” Let's try an example to illustrate the logic behind an emotion

Example:

• Premise: Steve learned as a child that being loud leads to punishment.

• Premise: Steve is in a loud room.

• Conclusion: Steve is feeling panic.

This is a completely logical reaction within Steve's system, within Steve's nervous system, even if it doesn't make sense to an outsider... yet. The “yet” matters, because the problem usually isn’t that the reaction is illogical, it’s that we haven’t taken the time to understand the logic behind it.

We often use “logical” to mean “objectively true” or “rational in the external world.” But at its root, logic means it makes sense within a given set of premises. But logic is about coherence, not correctness. From an EQ perspective, validating someone’s feelings is literally saying: “You make sense.” It doesn’t mean their reaction matches external facts - but it means their internal reasoning and history line up with why they feel the way that they do.

To say an emotion is logical is to say that if we understand the premises (their lived experience, past conditioning, needs), the conclusion (their emotional reaction) follows. What looks “illogical” from the outside is often just logic we haven’t taken the time to understand.

 But logic is about coherence, not correctness.

Logic vs Rationality

Another misunderstanding I believe happens is that people collapse “logic” into “rationality” and then set it against emotions. Rationality is a judgment on whether something aligns with socially accepted reasoning. Let us first look at the definition of rationality before we explore further.

Rationality = thinking or acting according to principles of reason - your beliefs and actions line up with evidence and valid inference.

To put it another way, logic is about internal consistency, rationality is about aligning with evidence and reality. Let us drag Steve into this, and use some examples to look at how these two differ.

Logical example:

• Premise: All unicorns are accountants.

• Premise: Steve is a unicorn.

• Conclusion: Therefore, Steve is an accountant.

That’s valid logic. The conclusion follows the rules, even though the premises are total fantasy fan-fiction.

Rational example:

• If you actually believed unicorns exist and started filing your taxes with Steve the Unicorn, that would not be rational. Rationality demands your premises be grounded in evidence and reality. So while the logical structure works, the belief system behind it is irrational.

  
  

In other words, logic makes sure your reasoning holds together; rationality makes sure you’re not reasoning about imaginary unicorn accountants in the first place.

So logic makes sure your reasoning holds together, and rationality makes sure it lines up with reality. But here’s where emotions often get misunderstood, they are dismissed as “irrational” simply because they don’t always fit external standards of rationality. The truth is, emotions have their own logic. To see it, we need to understand what emotions actually are.

Premise 2:

Understanding the Logic of Emotions

To understand the logic behind emotions we first need to understand what emotions actually are. Emotions aren’t random explosions of drama - they are intelligence, messengers from the body. Each emotion carries a signal about our needs, our boundaries, or our safety. Anger often signals a boundary crossed. Fear warns of danger, sadness shows us loss, and joy points toward what feels nourishing. Every emotion has its message. To dismiss them as “irrational” is to throw away the intelligence they carry.

I won’t go into all the details here, that’s another post in itself, but the point is that emotions are logical when you listen for the message they bring. If you understand the premises (the lived experience, the body memory, the need), the conclusion (the emotional reaction) makes perfect sense.

Emotions aren’t random explosions of drama - they are intelligence, messengers from the body.

Emotional vs Emotional Reactive

Another misunderstanding I believe happens is when people say emotion vs logic, they might also be hinting at someone being emotionally reactive, which is a whole other thing, because we're all emotional, but we don't need to be emotionally reactive. This is where tools like the 90-second rule can help us regulate, so instead of reacting, we can listen to the message the emotions are carrying, and respond from that intelligence.

Regulation is only the first step, however. What also happens is that it’s not just the external world that misunderstands our reactions - often we ourselves don’t understand the deeper logic behind them. What I find funny is how being non-emotional is promoted in this world, yet the majority of the population, including men, walk around reacting emotionally rather than rationally. I love how Brené Brown paraphrases the concept by neuroscientist Antonio Damasio into "We are not thinking machines that feel; rather we are feeling machines that sometimes think."

She suggests that human decision making is primarily driven by emotions and feelings, rather than pure rationality. Yes, even rolling your eyes, stonewalling, or walking out of the room are emotional reactions. And let’s not forget the men who claim to be “rational,” yet rage when their favourite sports team loses. We’re all emotional. The question isn’t whether we feel, but whether we’re aware of the logic behind our feelings.

Majority of the population, including men, walk around reacting emotionally rather than rationally

That is why sitting with, and understanding our own emotional reactions - validating, that is, understanding the logic behind our emotional reactions is important. Because when we understand our own logic, once we're able to validate and show compassion to ourselves, we are automatically able to apply that logic on other people's reactions. Because logic is trackable. We can follow the chain of reasoning forward, but also backward.

Logic can be reverse engineered. If we know the conclusion, we can trace back to the premises that produced it. The same is true with emotions. If someone explodes in anger at something small, that reaction isn’t random or irrational - it points back to a hidden premise, maybe a wound where they learned that being ignored was dangerous, or that their needs would never be met unless they shouted. This is exactly how emotional intelligence and trauma work function, you start with the visible “reaction,” then trace back to the premises that created it.

We are not thinking machines that feel; rather we are feeling machines that sometimes think.

And when we can do that, both for ourselves and others, that’s when compassion becomes possible. This is how we spread love in the world, from the inside out. This is not to excuse abusive behaviour of course, but to increase understanding of our fellow human beings. Because I do believe that we are all doing the best we can given whatever tools we have and the circumstances we're experiencing.

Conclusion

Therefore, I say emotions are logical.

They may not be rational in the sense of fitting neatly into “objective reality,” but they always make sense in the internal reality of the person feeling them. The work of emotional intelligence is often just this: listening closely enough to reverse engineer the reaction and uncover the premises it came from.

Example:

• Premise: Logic is about coherence.

• Premise: Emotions carry coherent messages.

• Conclusion: Therefore, emotions are logical.

Example:

• Premise: Humans are emotional.

• Premise: Steve is a human.

• Conclusion: Therefore, Steve is emotional.

Sorry to burst your unicorn bubble, Steve. Unfortunately you are both human and emotional. I hope you find a good therapist, or, if you’d rather work with me, check out the services section.