Read:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Linuxhttps://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_WayThat all sounds nice if that's the sort of thing that tickles your imagination.
In day to day business, Arch is a rolling distribution that contians the latest features, fixes and of course, their bugs. Debian is different in that respect in that it only sees security and bug fixes, but no major version updates for components (or at least, not very often to my knowledge).
Arch requires a little more attention and I suppose its a little steeper to get it running, to get used to and to maintain. On the other hand, their wiki, guides and forums contain very accurate information and so far, anything I needed was found working and up to date on their wiki/forum.
Arch still seems to have a reputation of breaking regularly. This is no longer the case, at least not for me and the people I know that run Arch (which I admit, is only a handful of people). For the months with a steady flow of almost daily updates including big kernel and other core OS updates, I've not seen or heard of anything break.
With Debian, I ran into bugs that I couldn't get rid of, because updating a major component on Debian (not on the official repositories means compiling from source) required me recompile dozens of libraries and other dependencies (it just cascades into half the system) and then still break the system on the next update. On Arch this is a lot easier to fix or prevent from happening.
You could choose to update Debian from Stable to Testing or even unstable (sid). I tried and testing works quite well but missed some stuff for me, testing seems just broken most of the time. I hear people claim Sid is working fine for them, so I suppose it just depends and the same could be said for Arch.
The best thing you can do is to just try it
.