this argument only works if you are playing a short distance.
if you are playing longer, the guy who is accurate @ 200 yards will add a shot to his "consistent play" everytime. He will always be +1 or more depending if he makes his play. Whereas, your son, will always have the potential to be -1,0 or +1 based on his play. Whats the worst thing that happens, he shanks, and takes the same 1 stroke that the old man took to get the same distance. (Same score count). The old man always beats you because he doesnt mess up and is consistent in all facets of his game, not just his drive. If you played doubles with him, and he used your drive for the distance, i bet he'd kill you based on the extra distance and same consistency factor. Distance matters.
In the short range, the difference of 25-50' can be an entirely different shot selection and or disc selection.
By odds and statistics, in the beginning and until you are good enough, longer is better.
That doesnt account for the "ego factor" that with the short throw, you look like you "suck" in comparison to your experienced friends. I think most would rather have errant throws with comparable distance verses a slow and steady approach.
Refute the logic....
Golf is a matter of distance and "penetration". Getting closer is almost always better. If my 2 shots equal your 3 shots, who wins? I might shank one and need an extra shot, but i am still @ 3.