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.

160 SAVES

This is a professional note extracted from an online article.

Read more efficiently

Save what inspires you

Remember anything

IDEA EXTRACTED FROM:

How to disagree well: 7 of the best and worst ways to argue

How to disagree well: 7 of the best and worst ways to argue

https://bigthink.com/paul-ratner/how-to-disagree-well-7-of-the-best-and-worst-ways-to-argue

bigthink.com

1

Key Idea

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.

EXPLORE MORE AROUND THESE TOPICS:

SIMILAR ARTICLES & IDEAS:

Bad Arguments and How to Avoid Them

Bad Arguments and How to Avoid Them

https://fs.blog/2020/05/bad-arguments/

fs.blog

Productive arguments serve two purposes: to open our minds to truths we couldn't see - and help others do the same. Here's how to avoid common pitfalls and argue like a master. *** We're often faced with situations in which we need to argue a point, whether we're pitching an investor or competing for a contract.

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

How to Turn Disagreement Into a Team Strength - Ambition & Balance

How to Turn Disagreement Into a Team Strength - Ambition & Balance

https://doist.com/blog/how-to-turn-disagreement-into-a-team-strength/

doist.com

If you've ever worked closely with someone else in a work environment (so pretty much everyone), you've had a disagreement. Maybe you didn't agree with the current approach for tackling a project, or you weren't quite sold on the marketing of a new product.

8

Key Ideas

Disagreement is healthy

It is essential for success. It’s the hallmark of an engaged and involved team member. And it opens the way for testing and improving new ideas.

It should also be treated as a chance t...

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 more, be willing to change your perspective on disagreement and learn to better your arguments.

Ed Catmull
Ed Catmull
“You are not your idea, and if you identify too closely with your ideas, you will take offense when they are challenged.”

5 more ideas

How to Fix the Fights You're Sick of Having

How to Fix the Fights You're Sick of Having

https://estherperel.com/blog/how-to-fix-the-fights-youre-sick-of-having

estherperel.com

5

Key Ideas

It’s not necessarily a bad thing to fight
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