Almost all past publications have translated anicca, dukkha, anatta as impermanence, suffering, and no-self. So for your question… How do we determine when to use logic and reason in Buddhism?.. This is one instance that we’ve got to use our logic and reason as The Buddha has warned strongly against blind faith and encouraged the way of truthful inquiry.
In the Samyutta Nikaya (Anicca Vagga), when one refers to AjjhattaniccaSutta, Bahiranicca Sutta, Yadanicca sutta etc. the Buddha stated that the three characteristics of “this world” (all six senses) are related to each other - i.e., “if something is anicca, dukkha arises, therefore anatta”. Taking the long held interpretation of anicca to be impermanent and anatta to be “no-soul”, the above would read “if something is not permanent, suffering arises, and as a result one becomes “no-self””.
Permanence/Impermanence are properties of “things” (living beings and physical things) or “events”. On the other hand, nicca/anicca are perception’s in one’s mind about those “things” and “events” in this world of 31 realms. We cannot maintain anything to our satisfaction including “our” own body and that is anicca. Thus we become distraught and that is dukkha. Since we are helpless in preventing this, we are helpless, and nothing is with any real substance in the end; that is anatta.
“Impermanence” is something that is inevitable - a property that cannot be changed in this world. But “anicca” is a perception in someone’s mind and that perception can be changed. That is how one gets rid of suffering.
The Buddha has said,”Sabbe Dhamma anatta“. Could it then be “all dhamma are “no-self”? Dhamma includes everything including the inert. Does it mean to say, “a tree has “no-self”” or “a mountain has “no-self””? The correct interpretation is that nothing in this world is of any real substance in the end. They all come into being and are destroyed in the end, and that is anatta.