This article seems to me to conflate two things: how to have an exploratory discussion between two opposing viewpoints and how to win an argument.

For example, in an exploratory discussion, using your opponent's terms can lead to quicker definition of those terms, and less talking past one another. On the other hand, when trying to win an argument, allowing your opponent to frame the debate (either by using their terms or addressing/refuting their central points) can be the worst possible strategy!

I suspect that exploratory discussions where both parties are genuinely disinterested are rare in most contexts.