That kind of logic has been detrimental to many stranded individuals including hikers and what not. Perhaps staying by the car and waiting for someone to track you would be the most logical solution.
That is part of his plan to get out of the situation. Perhaps the most sound decision is to sit tight and wait, and pretend that you're not trying to solve your problem.
Figuring out how you will go about solving your problem, even if your solution consists in the conscious decision to do nothing requires careful, logical thinking. Of course, someone could arrive at the most plausible decision by chance, or by a hunch, or in other words bypass the route of rational thinking. However, in this case whether or not one arrives at the most plausible decision is left up to chance. However, one can maximize ones chances of arriving at the most plausible resolution by coming up with a systematic way to discover such solutions.
Therefore in this case logical thinking is desirable.
What I am saying is that we could go round with infinite senerios in which I could prove that logic is not as concrete as you think it is and that all is circumstantial, open for interpretation, and reletive. .
The most rational thinking is that which comes up with the most efficient ways to achieve the intended result within the given situation.
Thats why I transfer every situation into mathmatical equasions because it reduces the grounds for interpretation and offers understandable solution, but my solutions are not always right..
These equations you seem to have in mind represent the principles of human thought. Philosophers of Mathematics like Frege and Russell plausibly argued in favor of the identity of mathematics and logic. Mathematics is the sophistication of logic, it explores the nuance of laws of objective reasoning. Logic is primarily within the province of applied mathematics as it is concerned with applying the principles of reasoning to all human thought and action. Logic could be applied to analyze all statements. All human occurences could be described in statements.
Most the time my downfall is not faulty logic but the over use of it.
Which could be considered highly irrational
I have argued that for whatever situation we may be in, we have an agenda, either conscious or unconscious. We may have a clear notion of what we want, or we may harbor unconscious desires which need to be met. They are more likely to be met if they are clearly identified and a reliable plan with regard to how they are to be met is conceived.
Therefore, this is my argument in favor of the proposition that using logic leads to more utility than not doing so.
What may appear to be an over-use of logic tends to manifest in the following fashions. Focusing too much on the impersonal and spending too much time thinking, when it is also necessary to act.
I would classify this is as an abuse of logic rather than an over-use. Careful logical analysis of the situation should evince to us that it is important to consider the interpersonal variables of the situation and that it is also important to act at certain times. Thus, this does not undermine logic, but logic itself here shows that the action of people who are usually good at logical thinking tend to make logical errors themselves. In that case their reasoning may be flawless, or in terms of formal logic 'valid', yet unsound because they have failed to establish premises containing true information about the external world.