One of the current debates in the philosophy of logic is between those who defend the special character of logic and the logical anti-exceptionalism’s approach. Appended to this debate is the challenge of establishing an objective logical criterion of correctness beyond the logical system itself. In this paper, the role of normativity and objectivity of logic is analysed in the context of the problem of logical pluralism. It will be examined whether genuine logical facts can be accounted for, to find out how a theory incompatible concerning that logical law should affect our beliefs in such cases and justify some kind of non-factualism about that rule. Non-factualist approaches are discussed and shown to be unsuccessful. Finally, the role of logical normativity and whether it is apprehended through the subsequent acquisition and application of rules will be discussed.