There has been a long tradition of logic. It has been so convoluted, and often futile, that it is time to have a better way of measuring progress.
This new technique is almost as simple as adopting formal categories.
Instead of adopting a 'guise' such as metaphysics (including modal realism), or devolving on some paradox or trick of logistics, logical exceptionism sees the quantification of qualities as the key to understanding the inner workings of reasoning.
This is no mere epiphenomenon, instead it is a real science, the science of making not always the most brilliant deduction, but instead, the most appropriate and best.
This is possible by appreciating the objective categories which underly logical relationships.
There is a policy of 'going long', and then making the best of it.
It requires skill, and it requires an understanding of absurdities.
However, if in the end someone fails to describe what can work, it is still possible to choose a different context, or in other words, to be a specialist.
Although as a rule many things can be quantified to absurd lengths, the exceptionist seeks to reduce quantification by grasping the objective quantities of properties which qualify a given thing.
What is less important than connecting any given problem to the objective picture of all puzzles is the kind of indecision that delays real decisions about the nature of properties.
Here is one major example of demonstrating exceptionism:
The Rhino and Caffeine.
Rhino represents 'thing' Caffeine represents a 'modifier'.
Permuting the two elements results in a description of all types of things which have been modified.
My assessement of this is the following four categories:
What is especially useful is the implicit symbolism to all types of such relationships, showing that, at least at this level, exceptions are reducible to type-categories.
Perhaps it is surprising that two properties would have only four permutations, but it is worth noting that the importance of those categories as represented by their generality is in no way restricted by the limitation of the set. Indeed, the set contributes to significance when the variety is distributed evenly without unnecessary risk.