The discussion centers on the role of logic in understanding existence and whether it can answer all questions. Participants argue that while logic is essential for reasoning, it cannot provide answers to every inquiry, particularly those that are invalid or based on flawed premises. The conversation highlights the limitations of logic when addressing profound questions like the nature of existence, suggesting that asking "why do we exist?" is itself an invalid question because it presupposes a cause for existence, which cannot be logically established. The dialogue also touches on the relationship between logic and science, with some asserting that logic predates the scientific method and is foundational to scientific inquiry. Overall, the consensus leans towards the idea that logic is a tool for reasoning rather than a comprehensive solution to all existential questions.