I think it's important to to aim to be convincing but this is slightly different from "aiming to convince". Historically a necessary part of passing a degree in the West was the ability to argue both sides of a given proposition because if you can only successfully argue one side you don't fully understand the proposition in question.
There are two ways to argue - you can either seek to undermine your interlocutor and destroy their arguments or you can engage with them and seek to understand their argument. If both parties engage in the latter way of arguing then not only is the experience generally more congenial, it is also more humble.
It's the difference between saying, "You're wrong, because..." and saying, "I'm sorry, I don't believe that because..."
Put another way, you should be seeking to argue for your position and not against your opponent.
Bookmarks