There's a whole cavalcade of retrospectively obvious ideas, and this fits rather snugly - it had never occurred to me to use bidirectional improvements via disagreement as a deliberate rather than accidental process.

It forces both sides to argue in good faith, it forces clarity, and even in circumstances where no possible agreement can be reached, it pushes arguments on either side toward their strongest and most reasonable forms.

Of course, it does require that people on either side of a given argument need to be willing to engage and to do so in good faith.

(Captain Hindsight out.)