It doesn't appear to matter, as far as I can tell, if the vocalized phrase appears in the particular context of a debate, a discussion, a congenial gathering, whether it passes all logical scrutiny and universal judgment - whatever that might mean. What matters is that it is a linguistic formula like "Yes, but...", "Well perhaps, but...", or when spoken in agreement, "No, you see...", which does nothing more but indicate to the recipient that you wish to proceed amicably, that you don't respect their opinion itself, but are willing to assume or stand upon it (in order to tear it back down) or allow it to enter conversation. Unless it is spoken sarcastically, rhetorically as a question, and so on. But that's not important.
On the other hand, am I required to assume respect when I utter a phrase as such? No, but I am required to sort it into the context, sift it from all possible phrases, and conclude that, normatively, this phrase best represents my intentions per its colloquial use - not in regards its actual semantic content.
I can respect an argument, however. I disagree with, for example, Marx's interpretation of Hegel's structure of servitude and the social realization of self-consciousness, because I think Marx misinterprets the notion of Spirit (and thus argues against a straw-man, missing an entire aspect of the Hegelian philosophy) which forms through the positively characterized social interactions of the populace, and emphasizes the process of the negative to a suicidal extent. But, I have a great amount of respect for Marx's argument because it is well crafted, a well-worn analytical device (in literary theory, sociology, etc., - if not politically!).