There are some people that speak so quickly you genuinely suspect they've never stopped to think about anything. Frequently, logical-sounding arguments in favor of things you know are very bad have this feel to them. The conclusion is bad, and the reasoning, while fine, is not up to the task of convincing me that [terrible thing X is actually good], for instance.
Those feelings aren't a mistake! They're helpful clues, and you need time to let those feelings get explored. If something is bad, really try getting to the root of why it's bad. And then try again – these things can be confusing, and the first attempt doesn't always get a good lens.
When I hear someone using some of these lines of reasoning, I worry. I worry when I hear them not understand a reasonably coherent intellectualization of natural feelings. I wonder if they ever explored why those feelings might exist, whether they reconcile their principles with the strange world we live in. I wonder if they've confused the map with the territory and presumed their simpler model should be followed because it's been great so far.
But mostly I just feel ignored. And I fall silent. If these people wanted to hear from me, they'd ask, and make a real effort at listening. I'm not sure how much room modern discourse has for that type of thing, but there ought to be more. There is wisdom in the accumulation of strange feelings about things, about judgments we have trouble articulating. A book will give me time, to put it down, to think for a while. Few other media do the same. We rush past a feeling, rush past each other, and I think a lot of wisdom is lost.
Which is a shame, because the world is changing so much these days, we'd do well to shepherd the small bits we're developing, about how to live in this world.