I don't find your second point compelling in the slightest.

From reading your other responses, my conclusion is that in any hypothetical argument, you wouldn't consider either side to have better reasoning than the other and if you did, you would chalk it up to your own emotional biases.

Your attitude seems incompatible with the concept that one argument can be better than another.

Is my assessment inaccurate or is there some nuance here that I've missed?