How to Disagree.

On the face of it disagreement is a pretty trivial issue, but getting it right especially in an online conversation is a feat rarely achieved. “Right Disagreement” implies putting across an alternate view that is supposed to counter the argument not merely weaken it. Even the latter is hard come by at most times.
I have had my share of straw man arguments, denying the antecedent, fallacies of false cause and what not.
Paul Graham did the consolidation job to make inconsistencies easier to spot, categorizing into six broad units. He did that smartly, sorting according to frequency of usage in online world. (Link to Essay)

Pyx #2

I lost a friend years ago. My memory was burdened as he slipped far below. Then came along a pen that he gifted which refreshed everything. I can never prove that he exists. I can only claim by experience, he does. And experiences are personal, very personal! If the association is absent, I may never remember him again because pure reason would fail him till eternity.

Pyx #1

Escapism is the easiest route out, an acknowledgement of the fact that I am too weak to face the guns. The realization that it isn’t the fair way out isn’t hard to come by either. In this everlasting tussle of desires and actions, lack of latter is a crime as well. The quest of shattering the glass house of comfort, to have a truer attempt at conquering the distant desires is marred by inabilities of standing by dreams.  Such a guilt builds up until it is too heavy to be carried on converting glass into concrete and hopes into wishes.
  I have to codify the secret of alleviation. Waiting for a storm to pass does not help when I know it might never end. The doldrums have winds but the winds aren’t strong enough for a sail. We could lock ourselves in and pretend we lost the keys, pretend we are helpless and broken, pretend destiny was such, all until we have lost our dreams. And then look back and concede defeat at the hands of inaction not inability.