Did you just pose a strawman that a rationalist debater would ignore irrationality? Or that only use of rational arguments is rational, as opposed to rhetoric?

Did you just pose a strawman that a rationalist debater would ignore irrationality? Or that only use of rational arguments is rational, as opposed to rhetoric? As we stand, accrual debating is likely to entrench views of people rather than change them, even if irrationally. Experiment and results are more convincing than any amount of words.