deepstash
Beta
How to disagree well: 7 of the best and worst ways to argue
Paul Graham's disagreement hierarchy
- DH0. Name-calling: the lowest level of argument.
- DH1. Ad hominem: attackung the person rather than the point they are making.
- DH2. Responding to tone: The lowest form of responding to writing is disagreeing with the author’s tone.
- DH3. Contradiction: you offer an opposing case but very little evidence.
- DH4. Counterargument: a contradiction with evidence and reasoning.
- DH5. Refutation: quote someone back to themselves and pick a hole in that quote to expose a flaw.
- DH6. Refuting the central point: The most powerful form of disagreement.
176 SAVES
This is a professional note extracted from an online article.
Read more efficiently
Save what inspires you
Remember anything
IDEA EXTRACTED FROM:
1
Key Idea
SIMILAR ARTICLES & IDEAS:
8
Key Ideas
The art of disagreement
Mastering the art of considerate disagreement means expressing your beliefs without shutting down the discussion or angering the other side.
For this to happen, you have to listen mor...
Ed Catmull
Ray Dalio
5 more ideas
7
Key Ideas
Straw man arguments
A straw man argument is a misrepresentation of an opinion or viewpoint, designed to be as easy as possible to contradict.
The only purpose is for it to be easy to expose. I...
Hollow man arguments
This is a weak case (similar to the Straw man arguments) attributed to a non-existent group: Someone will fabricate a viewpoint that is easy to contradict, then claim it was made by a group they disagree with. Arguing against an opponent which doesn’t exist is a pretty easy way to win any debate.
People who use hollow man arguments will often use vague, non-specific language without explicitly giving any sources or stating who their opponent is.
Iron man argument
It is designed to be resistant to attacks by a defier.There arguments are difficult to avoid because they have a lot of overlap with legitimate debate techniques.
A person using an iron man argument will most likely make their own viewpoint so vague that nothing anyone says about it can weaken it. They’ll use jargon and imprecise terms. This means they can claim anyone who disagrees didn’t understand them, or they’ll rephrase their argument multiple times.
4 more ideas
It’s not necessarily a bad thing to fight
Certain lines should not be crossed, and it’s important to repair them.
For that, keep in mind you have to validate the other person’s feelings and acknowledge the fact they experience t...
The form fights take
- The first dynamic of an argument: you gather the information that reinforces your beliefs and neglect information that challenges them.
- The second dynamic: the negative attribution theory. If I’m treating you poorly, it’s because I had a bad day.
- The third dynamic: the negative escalation cycle. This is when we instigate from a person the very behavior we don’t want.
Mistakes during arguments
- "Holding: the absolute truth: We think that when we say something during a conflict, it is an absolute truth rather than a reflection of an experience. If I feel it, then it must be a fact.
- Using the words "always" and "never:" I always do all the work/You never help with the work. Nobody likes to be defined by someone else.
- Chronic criticism: It happens when you criticize so much that you leave the other person feeling like he can never do anything right.
2 more ideas