"Discussion for the sake of discussion"

I hear it said sometimes, "Do not make argument for the sake of the argument."
But, how about the "discussion for the sake of the discussion"?
I don't know what exactly is the definition of "discussion", but I tend to think that discussion for the sake of discussion is not good, either, of course depending on the situation.

If you want to have a meaningful discussion, I think the participant should have some agreements first, such as:
* as much as you have your points or reasoning (or justification), you have to admit the other person also has this all, and respect this fact
* in other words, the attitude of "I am right and you are wrong (no matter what)" has to be thrown away
* each present his/her points, reasoning, and then each try to understand the points, reasoning of the other
* then discuss on each presented thing based on the attitude listed above

If these points are not agreed upon, then the discussion will end up pouring oils onto fires of each side's "I am right and you are wrong.", participants all get angry and exhausted, and thus the situation will not only not be settled, but be even worsened (and some observer with some intention will be very satisfied...)

But, maybe it is not realistic to expect such discussion on some heated matters...