How to Disagree

Paul Graham’s essay How to Disagree proposes a framework for evaluating the quality of disagreements.

The Disagreement Hierarchy

From weakest to strongest:

DH0 - Name-calling: Whether crude or articulate, it’s merely insult without substance.

DH1 - Ad Hominem: Attacking the speaker rather than the argument. Unhelpful because “good ideas often come from outsiders.”

DH2 - Responding to Tone: Criticizing style rather than substance. This matters less than whether the author is actually correct.

DH3 - Contradiction: Simply stating the opposing position without supporting evidence.

DH4 - Counterargument: Adding reasoning and evidence to contradiction—the first genuinely convincing form.

DH5 - Refutation: Using direct quotes to identify and explain specific errors. Rare because it requires substantial work.

DH6 - Refuting the Central Point: The most powerful disagreement—attacking the author’s main argument rather than peripheral details.

Why This Matters

Higher-quality disagreement makes conversations better and people happier. Being mean becomes unnecessary “when you have a real point to make.”

My Takeaway

Before engaging in a disagreement, ask: what level am I operating at? Am I actually addressing the central point, or am I getting distracted by tone and peripheral issues?

How do you disagree well? I’d love to hear at persdre@gmail.com.