Sometimes there are statements about logic e.g. "That's not logical" and I can neither prove nor disprove a statement about logic with no definition for logic itself. It's just a negation and it's also like a metalogic - logic about logic and how can I know something about saying something is "illogical" ? A consequence should not be able to be illogical since then it wouldn't be a consequence would it?
I don't have a definition for logic itself so I don't consider that I can tell whether something is logical or illogical or in this case actually "not logical" so I don't even know if I can make to leap to "not logical" = "illogical"
A statement such as "A causes B" could be false and still be logic just that the statement is false. And if it's a statement that claims any logic shouldn't it be gödelnumberable and could we include just a negation and a negation about logic itself to logic?
I don't have a problem with a statement such as "The statement A is false." and the statement A could still be "logical" and false.
Maybe this is more about how people use the expressions "logical" and "not logical" without any definition of either?
Even if we had a non sequitur, how is it "not logical"?
Why do people say "not logical" and not even "illogical"?
Thanks for any response