Your letter bring up an interesting point today, or rather the second part of the letter from yesterday. First, that the convoluted and hypothetical twists of certain logical problems, while interesting, don’t do much if anything to help us towards virtue.
A point does need to be made, as is implicit even here in your letter, however. That while the paradoxes and riddles are not helpful in and of themselves, we still need to be proficient in the use of logic.
Your statement against the paradoxes is an argument: one a good philosopher needs to be able to parse, weight, judge, and either assent or refute. For a philosopher, Logic is indispensable, as your own argument here today proves.