We might argue for ever (and end up shouting?) about whether actual arguments are settled rationally or not. But the more interesting question seems to me to be "should emotion carry more weight than reason?" Culturally we are expected to say "No", but if we consider what pure rationality can and cannot do (ie show valid reasoning from given premises, including inconsistency and induction) we may wonder whether the selection of what argument to make and what conclusion to support can ever be without "interest" or some degree of emotion. If the arguments that matter to us are considered, how do we decide that they "matter" if not with emotion? But perhaps we need to stop and consider first what we mean by "emotion"?