The disagreeing web

For those that participate in the blogosphere – and by participate, I don't mean just "read" – there is a definite symmetry to the comments section. Comments typically start with a somewhat reasoned argument, and eventually devolve into comparing the author to Hitler by page 11. Paul Graham has written an interesting essay on disagreement on the web that makes compelling reading:

If we're all going to be disagreeing more, we should be careful to do it well. What does it mean to disagree well? Most readers can tell the difference between mere name-calling and a carefully reasoned refutation, but I think it would help to put names on the intermediate stages. So here's an attempt at a disagreement hierarchy.

(via DaringFireball)

-posted by Paul