[WithoutMe]

On the one hand, what your reply seems to tell me is that "reason" is our triggered by our will-to-convince, that is, reason has a personal aspect to it, a subjective smell to its very use! Whereas, logic is the "pure observation" of facts, or rather as I would like to say, logic is the observation of a thing where the observer has no sense of identificatin with what s/he is observing, otherwise, such an observation would become subjective!

The ananlogy which comes to my mind is that of the observer watching a movie & understanding the contents of what he is seeing as a kind of "logic", whereas a person observing something happening with somethng or someone (may be herself also) with which s/he identifes her/him self! Now, even in the first case, can there be no sort of identification while watching? If not so, then "logic" would always remain an ineffable idea, something to be verbalised about but never realised, that is, in the case of an identified-out-observation , logic ultimately turns out to be a reason which the majority has accepted, or that sort of reason which has been handed down by society (thru its edcation, teachers, books, media & the rest of it)!!!

Is there anything as true & pure logic (totally objective, I mean) in something that exists exists as a thing & not as an idea, or is all logic ultimately a beguiled version of propagandized reason?

The logic in mathematics is about numbers, which on its own has no existence, the numbers exists as an attribute of that for which we use the number, like "two candles" exists, but can "2" exist all alone, without any sort of association to that which it connotes, & here, I mean exist not as an idea, but as a hard fact, like the table in front of me?

If that is not the case, then logic & reason become the father & the mother of all sorts of relationships.... is it so? Can the one live absolutely devoid of the other?