Persusasive Arguments vs. Good Arguments

Yet another example of the contest between tactical pressures and strategic needs. From Jaltcoh, Is it effective to argue that homosexuality "isn't a choice"? Basically, what is the trade-off between an efficient argument (one that gets agreement the fastest) and an effective argument (one that will stand the test of time).

But at the least, I think it’s important to recognize that there is often a tradeoff between a good argument and a persuasive one, and to ask ourselves what our goal really is: improving people’s beliefs, or improving the processes of reasoning that they use to arrive at their beliefs?