I must add the addendum that despite anyone's attempts to pretend they are not motivated by their feelings, they are ALWAYS motivated by their feelings. Although Mill's comment seems to suggest that if we remove feelings from argument are capable of being objective, it is truly impossible to fully objective, because we are always coming from somewhere and have some motivation - otherwise we wouldn't even both to have the discussion.

Also, just in case you need mathematical proof that this is so, just check with Goedel's Incompleteness Theorem: no system of logic or mathematics can stand without at least one assumption from outside itself.

"Mill highlights the often overlooked reality that many opinions aren’t based on facts at all, but feelings. And so, contradictory points of information don’t shift emotionally rooted arguments, but only cause people to dig deeper into their emotions to hold onto those views. "
This message hits home all the time when one tries to post/comment on a subject that many have already made up their minds on. Food choices is one and immigration is another. Both subjects get a lot of name calling and unsubstantiated ideas. No matter how much evidence is given it is almost always emotion beats reason. This bodes ill for the future of our species when we can't even debate with out causing emotional vitriol. Liberals and conservatives alike all subscribe to the 'virtue' emotion over evidence based reason.

[quoteinvestigator.com]

Maybe no one showed her where the power outlets were?