Reason is something all humans are born with. Different people are gifted with different degrees of reason, but everyone has some. Reason does not simply involve a person's ability to process things like math, things like emotion and memory are also a part of reason. Most of the parts of a human's brain can be summed up in reason.

No one is born with logic. Logic is something that needs to be acquired. It comes to a person externally. Reason can be likened to a really amazing car. Logic can be likened to the understanding of how to properly drive that car. Reason is a natural talent. Logic is a developed skill.

No matter how inherently intelligent a person is, that intelligence generally will not assist them in "naturally" coming to logic. In fact, large doses of inborn intelligence can cause the opposite. A significant property of logic is mental discipline. If a person has enough genius that their mind can automatically solve problems without much conscious effort on the part of the owner of that mind, that can easily lead to laxity in mental discipline.

There are many people in this world that are absolute geniuses, and yet have no clue how to properly use their minds. They may have multiple Ph.D.'s, and yet they can be regularly found making declarations that are fundamentally illogical. That is a very vivid depiction of the distinction between reason and logic.

I would argue that the chief prerequisite for a logic is humility. If it is true that logic is something people do not start off with, that means their mind has to in some sense change to accommodate these rules of logic. This requires an openness of mind, a teachable spirit. To properly employ logic, you must not only be critical of ideas and processes that are presented to you, you must have a healthy skepticism of your own ideas and processes.

I believe that because of two presuppositions I hold: that none of us are omniscient, and that the human mind is a fallen mind and is fundamentally flawed. I doubt many people will disagree with the first of those two propositions, and arguing in support of the second is beyond the scope of this essay. But if the second presupposition is true, then logic is not simply the right use of reason, it is the right use of a broken reason. It is a pragmatic maximization of a machine that is not ideal. If a person were to put their mind on a pedestal and think it was flawless when it was in fact fundamentally flawed, they would arrive at far more error than someone who was acknowledging the flawed nature of their mind and trying to work within the limitations of those flaws.

That also applies to our lack of omniscience, something that is more generally agreed upon. Lack of data plagues at least most of our pursuit of truth. There is a natural tendency in human to cling to certainty in a situation where they really do not have enough data to be 100% certain. To properly use logic, a person must sacrifice much of the feelings of security such certainty would provide and acknowledge that their conclusions are a probability and not infallible. That requires a great deal of humility.