Full Idea
I think it is a strategic mistake to rest the case for classical logic on the Principle of Bivalence: the soundness of the classical logic rules is far more compelling than the truth of Bivalence.
Gist of Idea
The case for classical logic rests on its rules, much more than on the Principle of Bivalence
Source
Ian Rumfitt (The Boundary Stones of Thought [2015], 1.1)
Book Reference
Rumfitt,Ian: 'The Boundary Stones of Thought' [OUP 2015], p.13
A Reaction
The 'rules' to which he is referring are those of 'natural deduction', which make very few assumptions, and are intended to be intuitively appealing.