Reality is the other side of you. Fighting against logic, nature, existence or other inherent properties of the universe is fighting against yourself.
Reality is not your enemy, but it is as bitter-sweet as bitter-sweet can get. It loves making you its bitch so much it will cut your dick off and stick a heel through your eye. It never will admit it cares about you, but it does.
You love reality, even if you aren't consciously aware of that fact.
What does love matter, if you aren't consciously aware of it? That is left as an exercise to the reader, because I don't know the answer to that, and I'm not sure I even want to know.
What's your opinion on inconsistent consistency?
Not sure what you mean by this. There are paraconsistent logics which let you express certain inconsistent things in a "(para)consistent" manner. What about magical thinking with non-monotonic logic?
Humans do this all the time. Doing abductive reasoning or synthesis or just associative reasoning is useful in general intelligent beings such as humans because we have limited resources and we need something to focus our attention on. I never claimed human high-level reasoning to be consistent, but humans can, with a bit of effort, reason correctly. That said, we must make assumptions and we cannot know if our assumptions are correct, at best we can only infer this by evidence and bet on some being correct (which means we proceed as-if it's correct, and get burned if it isn't). By the way, if you assume your life has any meaning, or create said meaning yourself, you are a magical thinker by definition.
I don't think the term 'meaning of life' means unfortunately. I can make goals based on the values that I've settled through rational and irrational (such as emotional heuristics and baser drives/needs) means. I limit my "magical thinking" as much as possible, but I must make certain assumptions on which I base my reasoning and on which I function, otherwise nothing could ever get done, however aside from that, I can be rational. I should also say that you shouldn't expect human thought processes to generate logically valid reasoning all the time - you can't expect that from humans whose base reasoning is done by association and doing proper logical reasoning requires more careful conscious "reprogramming" (usually done early in life, learning logical patterns and meta-patterns, ...). I say there's nothing wrong with magical thinking. You seem to have the opinion that contradictions are contradictions. Well, I disagree. I think contradictions are not contradictions. What do you say to that?
I think humans can be as irrational as they want, but the ontology of reality itself has to admit a consistent description, otherwise it wouldn't be part of mathematical reality, or exist at all. Humans don't necessarily generate true beliefs about reality, but reality itself has to be consistent for it to be experienced or described in any manner.