Paul Graham's Disagreement Hierarchy (thank you Dani Rodrik)

From Dani Rodrik’s Blog (HERE) a most useful hierarchy of levels of disagreement is offered from Paul Graham’s Blog:

‘How to Disagree’

’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.

Many who respond to something disagree with it. That's to be expected. Agreeing tends to motivate people less than disagreeing. And when you agree there's less to say. You could expand on something the author said, but he has probably already explored the most interesting implications. When you disagree you're entering territory he may not have explored.’

Comment
The list runs from: DH0: Name-calling, through to DH6: Refuting the Central Point. I have not reproduced it because it deserves a wider consideration (HERE).

Readers of Lost Legacy will note that I often disagree with posts from authors of Weblogs or postings in the main stream media about their interpretations or repetitions of the interpretations made by others about Adam Smith.

Sometimes I may get carried away by my exasperation (for which I apologise) but with Paul Graham’s hierarchy to refer to, I shall try in future to improve my arguments by climbing up his hierarchy of disagreement.

Readers are invited to remind me when I slide down Paul Graham's hierarchy, provided they ensure they rise towards the top in their reminders!