The law of the excluded middle (x is either A or not-A) is similar to the law of non-contradiction (x cannot be both A and not-A), but they are not the same thing. Your apparent confusion, however, can be excused: after all, Kosko makes this mistake all the time.
I made the same mistake in my posts and I now realize I should've been more careful.
EM:)The law of the excluded middle (x is either A or not-A) defines the binarity of logic , and is more a definition than anything.
NC:)The law of non-contradiction (x cannot be both A and not-A) is a fundamental axiom of any known logic to me.
EM does not follow from NC, and vice versa.
If you replace EM with something else, you can get N-valent logic etc.
If you adopt non-NC, however, you get terrible results.
I have no problem with your analysis if I accept your starting point "consciousness is a product of logic". (I hope I got this the right way round ?)
I believe there is logic involved in everything, so consequentially also in consciousness. That is, if you carefully map the principles, axioms, rules of procedure, theorems and definitions of formal logic to any real system, you will see that logic models the real system perfectly well. I believe any problems you may find will arise from incorrect mapping.
In other words, I believe logic is everywhere If you want it to be, and you can base models of anything on logic.
But to say "consciousness is a product of logic" is maybe a bit strong, because it gives an impression that the mere logic of it somehow invokes consciousness which I don't believe. It is like saying that "gravity is a product of logic" which it is certainly not.
We must be careful here because algorithms are not produced by logic also; you get algorithms from logic, set theory, and additional definitions which conjure the whole theory into existence. It is the definitions and additional axioms that do the trick, not logic itself.
While I don't believe that theory of algorithms explains consciousness, and I believe that consciousness is NOT itself an algorithm, I believe that consciousness is nonetheless logical. It is the additional axioms and definitions that don't fit and yield, and we need something stronger.
I have to do some reading; the second-order cybernetics will be a good place to start. Thank you for valuable references.