I think your main issue is with those who do analytical philosophy. When posed 'twice two makes four', "analytical philosophers" will not directly agree or disagree, instead they raise more questions like what do you mean by 'twice', by 'two', by 'makes' and by 'four' before they finally agree or disagree or even derailed leaving all questions unanswered.

It's unfair to dismiss them altogether, because being anal is important to achieve profound understanding of a subject. But it happens many times that focusing too much on a tree, you'll miss out the whole forest. But I note that given that there's no restriction of time and resources, there's nothing wrong in studying the forest tree by tree.

It is also often the case that some are eager to win arguments because there is the belief that truth is truth, it is irrefutable. Therefore winning an argument implies you are holding the truth -- a hasty conclusion. I guess that's why people say that wisdom comes with age. Young people are hasty. That must be the case. (Notice the irony  ).