In my own online interactions with people of that ilk (incl. even close relatives), I have sadly noted that even repeatedly identifying their main arguments as "invalid" (and even always clearly identifying the specific fallacy - i.e., "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc!" or "Bulverism!") elicits hardly any coherent response - excerpt perhaps an indignant "You're being mean and hurtful!" or "But it isn't fair!"
I know for a fact that some of these people took college-level classes in Classical Philosophy, etc. - but they appear to have utterly forgotten or even actively disavowed Western Civilization's 2,300-year-old tradition of Aristotelian logic (though they won't admit to it).
Regards,
My experience exactly. They may have one very easily refuted counter-objection, but after that they either get angry, refuse to discuss it further, or burst into tears.
Wow, this explains a lot about my interactions with some people. They make a statement of fact, and seem to want their emotion validated before we can go on. They also sometimes or frequently respond by pointing out what they think my feelings are.