Halfway through a lot of arguments there is a fork, and most couples take the same branch without noticing. The question stops being 'what do we do about this' and becomes 'which of us is correct.' Everything after that is evidence-gathering, and evidence-gathering has never once resolved a domestic dispute.
Terry Real describes this as the difference between operating from the individual and operating from the relationship — you can win the point and lose the afternoon, and quite a lot of people do this repeatedly without ever quite registering the trade. It is not stupidity. Being right is genuinely satisfying, it feels like justice, and in the moment it is the more available goal, because 'getting somewhere' requires the other person and 'being right' does not.
The tell that you have taken the wrong branch is usually the arrival of the record. Dates, quotations, what-you-said-in-the-car. Precision about the past is nearly always a sign that the conversation has stopped being about the future, and no amount of it will move anybody, because your partner is not disputing the transcript. They are disputing what it meant, and that is not a thing your evidence touches.
The way back is a question you ask yourself rather than them: what do I want to be true tomorrow morning. Sometimes the honest answer really is that the point matters more, and that is allowed. Usually it is not, and the moment you notice, you can say so out loud — 'I think I'm arguing to win, and I'd rather sort this out' is a sentence that visibly changes the temperature of a room. It also costs you nothing, which is the part people find hardest to believe until they try it.
Next argument, when you catch yourself reaching for the record, stop and ask what you want to be true tomorrow morning. Say the answer out loud, even if it is inconvenient.
