So Wikipedia tells me that "modern philosophers reject quantum logic as a basis for reasoning because it lacks the material conditional". "Material conditional" is the jargon name for statements of the shape "P implies Q".
In other words, allegedly modern philosophers think we absolutely need an operation whose truth table is equivalent to "(P and Q) or ((not P) and Q) or ((not P) and (not Q))".
But, like... I see that as clearly unnecessary. What I see as necessary is "P adjusts the probability of Q".
And of course "P implies Q" is just a special case of "P adjusts the probability of Q", where the probability of P can only be 0 or 1 and not anywhere in between, and if it is 1 then the probability of Q is adjusted to 1. But that's profoundly unreasonable and unrealistic, and that adjustment is an infinitely strong adjustment.
(Much like accelerating an object with mass to the speed of light is unreasonable and unrealistic under general relativity, because first you need infinite energy and then you need to use it to make that infinitely strong adjustment to momentum. Logically impossible and we might even come to see it as nonsensical as we understand how reality works better.)
