Debating religion nowadays feels like mental decay, honestly

As-salamu alaykum - this is more of a rant than a careful essay, but I’ve been thinking about how debates about religion have changed. If you look at classical scholarly debates - whether sectarian, kalam, or philosophical - they often followed a formal, almost ritualized etiquette. Adab al-jidal wa al-munazara was real: people aimed to seek the truth, not just score points. You don’t need to go all the way back to medieval times to see it. Those methods persisted into the 19th and early 20th centuries too: syllogisms, metaphysics, careful argumentation were normal. Now it feels like the goal has flipped. Too many online discussions are about persuading or performing, not about honest inquiry. Debates turn rhetorical and emotional, and people throw around claims that are easily checked but presented as if they’re rigorous proof. I’ve seen a lot of shallow quoting-out-of-context from non-Muslims trying to twist Quranic verses, when a quick check shows the error. Muslims aren’t blameless either. Some of the new wave of da’is - influencers and YouTubers - sometimes use weak arguments, sloppy structure, and clear bias. Editing clips to make a point or leaning on flashy rhetoric happens more than it should. Lately there’s also been a trend of Hadith rejectors influenced by Western ideologies and modern movements. Centuries of scholarship get dismissed not because of serious research but because of surface-level takes or outright misunderstanding. What’s worse is the lack of effort to study context or history before making bold claims. The whole scene is disheartening. There’s so much superficiality and arrogance, and it does an injustice to the tradition. The scary part is how common it’s become. It’s repetitive and empty enough that it really does start to feel like brain rot.