|||

how to disagree

I don’t know how I happened across this website from 2008 but the opening sentence says so much about how much the web has changed since then:

The web is turning writing into a conversation. Twenty years ago, writers wrote and readers read. The web lets readers respond, and increasingly they do—in comment threads, on forums, and in their own blog posts.

The author — Paul Graham — then outlines what he describes as a disagreement hierarchy:

  1. Name-calling
  2. Ad Hominem
  3. Responding to Tone
  4. Contradiction
  5. Counterargument
  6. Refutation
  7. Refuting the Central Point

paulgraham.com/disagree.html

Paul’s list is such a simple and useful way of thinking about not only the claims we make, but how we listen to others making claims.

Creative commons image from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Doctors_Disagree

Up next midlifing uncertainty and continuous updating Remember that when people announce they “believe science” they are believing in something which has features of uncertainty and continuous updating
Latest posts the end of nature thinking like a consumer eliminate the friction Look and Look Again astray awkwardly sign on the door ask nature ecosytemic practice research self portrait as time the comfort/chaos circle things will have to change ladder of inference physical connection berry on minimalism stimming the body isn’t a thing postcards no country your morals eating irritating in others awakened transfiguration bits of unsolicited advice stockdale paradox hands that don’t want anything singing and dancing losing oneself given a price on remembering everything Godin on ideas