(Distinctions are subtleties of language that, when gotten, cause a shift in a belief, behavior, value, or attitude.)


We can likely agree on what it means to be logical. When logical, we have clear data or information. Even time-sequenced. Each component draws from past experiences that have proven to be true. Logical conclusions thus tend to grow from the accumulation of clear individual pieces.

Reasonable may or may not have that same level of proven clarity. But reasonable includes aspects that we cannot measure through logic. Such as feelings, intuition, gut reaction, or “That just doesn’t smell right.” And yet, as reasonable unfolds, it can turn out to be correct. Even transcending a logical conclusion.

Asimov observed in one of his books, “a robot … is logical but not reasonable.”

With reasonable and logical arguments, each can have its place. Yet, it’s worth looking at the distinction between them so we don’t get trapped by either. What does “trapped” mean?

It can be easy to take a few facts and project them into a logical conclusion. But when we include other, more subtle information, the conclusion may not be reasonable. Using both processes helps us see more clearly the available wisdom.


Coaching point: Does that seem reasonable?


Copyright 2025 Steve Straus. All rights reserved.