> This is true if the arguer is hostile, but as I've gotten older, if I get the sense that someone is entering an argument with the primary goal of "winning", I'll try to avoid that framing or just look for an offramp entirely.

Absolutely. The best kinds of arguments are those where you both have the shared goal of reaching consensus, and treat reaching consensus as a collaborative activity of finding the correct answer, even though you disagree with the starting point. There are a few techniques for this, which work well when operating in good faith, and can backfire when dealing with hostile counterparties. Most things work badly when arguing with hostile counterparties.