Logicians, studying logic, have concluded that there are an infinity of logics. This discovery is called logical pluralism. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/think/article/abs/guide-to-logical-pluralism-for-nonlogicians/EDFDFA1C9EB65DB71848DABD6B12D877
What an infinity of logics means to our world, is that we can postulate that aspects of our world follow a specific logic, then apply empiricism to evaluate this hypothesis. Logic theory would be infinite, but the logic of our world, would be an issue to study empirically.
We seem to be born with an intrinsic logic sense. Evolution gifted us with an assumed logic. Studies of our reasoning, however, quickly show that our intrinsic "logic" is self contradictory. However, apply that intuitive logic to testing and refining itself, and the classical logic of the ancient Greeks is basically what falls out. IF we assume that evolution would tune us to use the most useful logic, then classical logic should be our assumed starting point in trying to test the world for what logic it follows.
There are known problems with classical logic. One is its failings with absolutes and infinites (leading to many of the contradictions and paradoxes identified in classical philosophy). Of great concern when one treats logic as an empirical enterprise, is that empiricism uses a 4-state logic (unknown, supported, challenged, and unevaluable), while classical logic uses only two states (true and false) and declares all four empirical states to violate the Law of the Excluded Middle. Classical logic therefore is a useful tool in much of our world, but it appears to only be a useful "engineering approximation", which per its own criteria would make it "false".