For six years at school I studied Latin. It was one of two favourite subjects at the time for me, and I've never regretted that I learned it, though what I retain of what I learned is little, since I haven't used it much; I have some odd rules knocking around in my head - like the one involving 'towns, small islands, domus and rus' - and I can look at something in, say, Spanish and make more of it than I otherwise would have. Might I have benefited more from studying another living language, on top of the one I did in fact study, namely French? I don't know. Maybe. But in any event Latin was a part of my education that I remain happy about. The one argument for learning Latin that has always struck me as a nonsense, however, is that in the second letter here:
Latin and ancient Greek are essential in developing logical and critical thinking...For this to be true, non-students of Latin capable of logical and critical thought would have not to exist. For a student of Latin to have missed that point shows that not only is the study of Latin not necessary for logical thought, it is not sufficient either.