the more I think about it, the more I believe people aren't convinced by arguments directly
people are convinced when they like an idea or want to be seen as the type of person who believes an idea
this also applies somewhat to people who do try to use reason and evidence correctly, they also want to be seen as "that type of person"
I don't know how useful this is in practice, but it might be helpful to understand that your goal in convincing isn't to argue someone into submission with your logic
to truly win someone over, you must convince them there is desirable status and/or intrinsic benefit in switching hirearchies
this can't be done directly, and I think this explains at least some of why there is a lot of intense arguing with very little convincing
people are working within the hierarchies they want to be in and rarely have a desire to switch
so people make arguments that are iron clad using the assumptions of their chosen hierarchy, but they do nothing to persuade others because they aren't interested in being a part of your hierarchy
you have to switch their desire to be in your ingroup before any of your arguments become convincing