Playing devil's advocate = a healthy skill?

if i say no, because it is not healthy to take the evil side, that will be based on my idea of moral but morals differ. however the morals and intention to play the de. advocat can be healthy if the de. advocat can win the debate. now debate does not mean it was about what is right and wrong, it is about winning and argument no matter right or wrong, someone can be false and still can effektivly put a simple strawman argument together than superficialy plausible and then the truthfull person has all hands full of work in the debate to deconstruct the strawman (fake) argument.

Being able to see things from opposed sides is an essential skill in being able to think. If all you can do is take on what other people believe, and then run with the herd, that's not thinking at all.

In the ancient Greek schools of philosophy, you had to be able to present your opponents argument *better than he could* before you were allowed to present your own. That is as it should be.

RAWR is an idiot, a complete moron. What he/she/it is saying is that he's never bothered thinking and only ever reverberates the thoughts originated by others.

not at all. there's another term for so-called devil's advocates, it's called "trolls". and pretty much everybody finds trolls annoying and doesn't listen to a word they say.