I recommend reading through SEP (Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy) articles relevant to your interests.

For example

anti Wax — Ansiktsburk

I'm anti-wax too! I like women with hairy legs! :smile:

I suppose, studying Philosophy at university will prepare you for discussions like is this ism better than that? But otherwise, are there any good resources on how to learn to enjoy those word battles? I do follow them from time to time and feel like einstein when I understand what its all about, but I very seldom come to any a-has afterwards — Ansiktsburk

Not everything is an IQ -show off. You can look up the meanings of all difficult words. Just click on them and let Google do the work (that's how I do it). You'll reach a point of insight!

It is rare in the course of discussion to achieve a sudden new insight. What is difficult about the more abstract discussions though is to understand what is at stake. Sometimes nothing is at stake except the meaning of a word in a particular context, but sometimes the whole of civilisation is potentially transformed.
The latter is unlikely to be the result of a discussion here, though.

But while SEP is the dog's bollocks for serious depth, I recommend rather a quick crib-sheet that will allow you to spatter the big cheeses' names through your posts without actually have to read the buggers, and get a handle on some of the isms and other obscure terminology. Something like this: http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/

Dont be intimidated by the philosophical masterbations of those types of threads. Its not a sign of high IQ but rather knowledge/education. People who learn big words like to use them, but the concepts don’t require the academic descriptions. You do have to learn some of the basic terms in order to keep up in the discussion but google will give you the gist of most of it.
If your interested in the word battles, you can ask for clarification on some of the terms. I’ve observed those with philosophical education are happy to clarify as long as they feel like you’ve put in the effort to learn the basic ideas behind the discussion. Otherwise you will be told to google it, or given a link.

Can an amateur learn how to enjoy "academical" philosophical discussions?
No. One either has it, or one doesn't.

But otherwise, are there any good resources on how to learn to enjoy those word battles? — Ansiktsburk

To begin with, learn the proper meaning of "to enjoy", and stop using it the way commercial advertisers and pop psychology gurus do.

An amateur can become interested if it becomes clear what is at issue, why, for example, the question can't simply be settled by a definition.

But being a professional philosopher or someone trained in philosophy does not mean that such questions will be of interest.

Every professional philosopher was at one time an amateur philosopher. It may be that such questions led someone to pursue philosophy, but it might also be that if not for other more compelling issues someone might conclude that philosophy was not worth pursuing.

If you find a discussion interesting but don't understand how a word is being used, I say first stop is just Wikipedia. Asking is actually even safer, because people use technical terms, um, creatively.

If there's an argument or a point you don't understand, absolutely ask, if you're interested.

I'm probably the sole vote here against SEP, so I'll say avoid it like the plague. Really. Don't read SEP. Maybe read a little of the IEP, if you must, but not much of that either.

Can an amateur learn how to enjoy "academical" philosophical discussions — Ansiktsburk

Have you thought about the kinds of things we talk about here? What are your ideas on the nature of reality, the basis of morality, the source of political authority, the meaning of art...? Can you write well enough to express them clearly? Anyway, have at it, keeping this from Emerson's "Self-Reliance" in mind:

To believe your own thought, to believe that what is true for you in your private heart is true for all men, — that is genius. Speak your latent conviction, and it shall be the universal sense; for the inmost in due time becomes the outmost, — and our first thought is rendered back to us by the trumpets of the Last Judgment.

But otherwise, are there any good resources on how to learn to enjoy those word battles? I do follow them from time to time and feel like einstein when I understand what its all about — Ansiktsburk

Why you need to learn how to enjoy these kind of discussions??You just enjoy them or not simply. Why would you want to force yourself enjoy something that might not like at the end??
You feel inferior when you think you can't participate and you wanna change that or what?? If yes you do very wrong. It's nothing more than a matter of taste. So don't worry at all.

I can read them as a sudoku or a math exercise, just showing off IQ, like — Ansiktsburk

As someone else mentioned (Srap Tasmaner I think) to another thread "Don't believe the hype. Most of us are full of shit"

I do follow them from time to time and feel like einstein when I understand what its all about, but I very seldom come to any a-has afterwards — Ansiktsburk

Very simply, The Truth Is Simple
No facts are correct 100% of the time.
And most words have multiple meanings so a combination of words can have infinite meaning.
The vast majority of what you see (especially here) is self aggrandizing.
Therefore enjoy and feel superior.
When you understand Methods of Reasoning: Philosophy 101
you will recognize that the vast majority of people are not using Logic.

The beauty of jargon is that it usually constrains itself to its own specialization. Just navigating the “discourse domain” of academic philosophy leaves one thinking that philosophy is merely the carrion for so many scavengers.

It takes a quite a bit of effort, in my experience. What makes it worse is the fact that many people disagree on what these words mean.

The Sanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is good, though not infrequently technical.

Honestly, I suggest you read through Galen Strawson's Mental Reality. That's how I began. It was an effort, had to read it several times to get it fully. But it was well worth it. Defines terms and controversies rather well. Maybe it'll be easier for you. But it's worth a shot.