@
muir well the thing I often remind is that logic=/=reason. I mean just think of the most logical thing -- a computer. Literally written in binary, does things exactly and strictly according to some logical procedure.
This is very different from how people reason, in that yes, a reason must be something we can translate into logical terms, and which must address all relevant features whose relevance can be framed logically.
However, a reason is ultimately also a conceptual thing existing in the mind and there may be infinitely many ways to logically capture the same reason.
This is the basis as far as I understand for the distinction Jung makes between thinking and feeling and why he can call the feeling function rational -- he means it is very in touch with the rational mind, even if its purpose isn't primarily to create logical arguments.
I think this is very related to the point you mentioned about the potentially irrational, emotional nature of some intellectuals with a weak "function of the heart" so to speak -- in other words, they're detached from conceptualizing the more emotive aspects of consciousness, so that they remain emotional, and become insufficiently harmonized with reason.
Jung often emphasized how emotion=/= the feeling function, and I really think as someone who identifies as a T type, this is very analogous to how logic =/= the thinking function either -- rather these two functions, it's safe to say, bring feelings and logic respectively in harmony with reason, without which one has either the empty feelings of a haphazardly emotional being, or the pedantic logical formalism of a computer without the "spice" that turns it from logic into true reasoning.
