Encouraging. And how is that going so far? If I meet a fellow Philosopher now, can I prove him wrong in a way he'll accept?
It depends on what you mean by that. If someone presents a view that is inconsistent with the accepted facts, then you you can "prove them wrong" in that sense.
But that's not really the point of philosophical inquiry -- the point is to flesh out each view entirely, and look for the best possible explanation of the subject. Those kind of explanations don't always (or even usually) come from outright rebuttals -- they come from synthesis, refinement of the situations considered, improvements in clarity, etc.
I've heard more than one person say, too, that philosophy progresses by creating new subjects. When you consider that pretty much all of logic, political thought, and biology come from the tradition started by Aristotle, that claim sounds reasonable.