Seems pretty logical to pursue your own interests, which are inherently human and personal. We don't know the interests of the individuals who choose to live in Phoenix, so we're not in a position to say they're right or wrong, logical or illogical to do so. But, we can guess. It's easy to guess interests which would make the decision to live there completely logical. They may not be your interests or mine, but then again they're not obliged to share your interests or mine. Put another way, if it "justifies" (i.e increases the likelihood of getting) what you want, then it's not that it appears logical. It is logical.
Logic is using facts/premises plus reason. You are describing just doing what you want. Being purely self interested in order to justify your actions.
Technically, being self interested isn't wrong. But it isn't Logic.
Logic
""Logic studies arguments, which consist of a set of premises together with a conclusion. An example is the argument from the premises "it's Sunday" and "if it's Sunday then I don't have to work" to the conclusion "I don't have to work".[1] Premises and conclusions express propositions or claims that can be true or false.""
Self Interest
"First, psychological egoism is a theory about the nature of human motives.
Psychological egoism suggests that all behaviors are motivated by self-interest. In other words, it suggests that every action or behavior or decision of every person is motivated by self interest. It also suggests that every action must be motivated by self interest. The doctrine of selfish motivation is simply a natural law of psychology. Just as it is a natural law of physics that bodies tend to move toward one another in proportion to their masses and at velocities inversely proportionate to their distances from one another, it is a natural law that all motivations are, ultimately, selfish."
Of course, we are getting into definitions of words. And technically, I do agree, people can do what they want, there is no right or wrong. I just don't think it is logical.
> Logic studies arguments, which consist of a set of premises together with a conclusion.
Premise: "I want warm weather and cheap housing."
Premise: "People should move to the places that offer what they want."
Premise: "Phoenix offers warm weather and cheap housing."
Conclusion: "I should move to Phoenix."
Ah, the age-old debate of logic versus self-interest. Sure, logic is about connecting the dots with premises and conclusions, but let's not kid ourselves—most of our decisions are driven by what we want.
So, if someone wants warm weather and cheap housing, and Phoenix fits the bill, then it's a no-brainer.
1. *Premise:* "I want warm weather and cheap housing."
2. *Premise:* "Phoenix offers warm weather and cheap housing."
3. *Conclusion:* "I should move to Phoenix."
Boom. Logical and self-interested. Just because it's driven by personal desire doesn't make it illogical. It's logic with a dash of "I know what I like." So yeah, moving to Phoenix makes perfect sense if that's what floats your boat.
"
You can make any premises you want to satisfy your goals. So just do what you want. Don't need to kid yourself that it was logical.
I don't have to kid myself that it's logical because I know it's logical. That's cold comfort, however, because we're not going to create a more just future by winning a debate, especially against individuals. "Logical" is no more a conversation-ending mic-drop than "illogical" is. If we want a more just future with a more environmentally-sane economy, we'll have to threaten policymakers to change policy. No amount of moral grandstanding with individuals is going to help matters.
The point was it is not logical, 'human logic' is fallacious. It only appears logical if it justifies what you want.