Discussions are good, but emotions are better left to emos.-
Hm, I hadn't drawn the connection to emotions, but you could be right.
I would say emotions are better left to art, to be controlled by the one who experiences, and left to fuel.
The problem with arguments, is that generally neither party is really listening to the other. They scan the other person's view for somewhat strawmanned (i.e. not what was really being expressed) versions of the arguments, so they can auto-strike and strengthen their own view, and perhaps to "convert" the malleable to reason as they do.
I find that usually, all that is going to be said will be said at the start and then reiterated. Something like: thesis -> anti-thesis -> thesis -> anti-thesis, ad infinitum, rather than the much more efficient: thesis -> anti-thesis -> synthesis.
Without a synthesis of views, what is the point?
(I do see the holes in the synthesis view, such as falling into compromise and lowest common denominator opinions, and counter-productive "progress")