Central points versus name-calling

In Adam Grant’s book “ Think Again “ he references Paul Graham’s “hierarchy of disagreement”, saying:

“In the hierarchy of disagreement created by computer scientist Paul Graham, the highest form of argument is refuting the central point, and the lowest is name-calling.”

This hierarchy wasn’t one that I was familiar with, so I took some to understand what it looked like. Here is Graham’s essay that explains it, with the hierarchy going like like:

1. Name-calling: That’s easy to understand.
2. Ad hominem: Attacking the person, not the idea.
3. Responding to tone: Attacking how an idea was presented rather than the idea itself.
4. Contradiction: Essentially just disagreeing with an idea.
5. Counterargument: This is a contradiction with reasoning and the first form of a convincing disagreement.
6. Refutation: This is quoting someone and explaining why they’re wrong.
7. Refuting the central point: This is the most powerful form of disagreement. Prior to this level you have been unclear or, in the worst case, deliberately dishonest.

Why?

So why does this matter? Graham addresses it quite well, with two main thoughts: