I prefer to think of them as "perfectly acceptable character traits" - those bad habits I and Dandy Gilver share.
They make her a great detective and me a . . . writer who at least types more than she deletes.
The same perfectly acceptable character traits would make us atrocious critique-group-members, useless - possibly dangerous - therapists, and calamitous diplomats.
Can you guess where I'm going yet?
We both believe, Dandy Gilver and I, that old Aristotle had it just about right. All three of us believe in absolute facts, infallible logic and supreme reason, and that the exercise of reason is the highest virtue. It helps a lot when you're solving a case (I imagine) and it certainly helps when you're putting a plot together. But boy-oh-boy we'd make lousy hippies.
I truly believe there's one side to everything (the truth) and it never depends which way you look at it. Drives my husband nuts* when we disagree. I'll grant that there's a danger of tenacity if you only argue because you think you're right and you think the thing you're right about matters. The good side is that I stop arguing if someone shows me I'm wrong. Not everyone does that. A lot of them are in Congress.
(*It would drive Dandy Gilver's husband nuts too if they went in for conversations. But, while he'd probably fetch a bucket of water if Dandy was on fire, her personal philosophy is her business.)
And it's not as bad as it sounds because the one place Dandy and I don't dance in step with Aristotle is that he saves his biggest lifestyle drumroll for what he calls The Golden Mean - moderation in all things. I reckon even if you did the necessary edit - "Moderation in all things except pies and Dalmations" - you're still better off with the Golden Rule. You know the one. I like it in its Bill and Ted incarnation: Be Excellent To Each Other.
That's the best habit of all.