So long-winded as me, you mean? I completely admit it *g*...
Yes, and avoid 'illogical'. "Logic is an organised way of going wrong with confidence". Or alternatively, "logic is only useful when the predicates are agreed", so you can say "that is not logical to me" (i.e. it does not follow based on the predicates you use/prefer/choose) but since I work with different predicates implying that my logic is faulty based on your predicates is, well, illogical. If I contradict myself based on my own predicates then feel free to call me on it, but implying that I may have made a mistake or have forgotten to tell you the basis on which I was working is rather more polite and more productive than just calling me an idiot. Similarly, if you have proof which satisfies you (note that absense of proof is not proof of absense) then feel free to point me to it -- it may not satisfy me as proof but at least I'll have a basis for understanding your reasoning.
no subject
Yes, and avoid 'illogical'. "Logic is an organised way of going wrong with confidence". Or alternatively, "logic is only useful when the predicates are agreed", so you can say "that is not logical to me" (i.e. it does not follow based on the predicates you use/prefer/choose) but since I work with different predicates implying that my logic is faulty based on your predicates is, well, illogical. If I contradict myself based on my own predicates then feel free to call me on it, but implying that I may have made a mistake or have forgotten to tell you the basis on which I was working is rather more polite and more productive than just calling me an idiot. Similarly, if you have proof which satisfies you (note that absense of proof is not proof of absense) then feel free to point me to it -- it may not satisfy me as proof but at least I'll have a basis for understanding your reasoning.