Wouldn’t that merely be responding to tone?

We can.

Yup, it is problematic when others keep their arguments nearer the bottom. But at least your argument will have been valid. Even if they do attempt childish suppression.

One can even reference Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement, and some will still remain on the attack at the bottom. As just happened to me on another thread on lemmy. It harms their credibility, and their cognitive ability.

The chart does not cover fallacies like strawman arguments. Perhaps that’s around a corner of the “pyramid”, on a side not shown.

Could be not even on the chart, or could be suppression.

Orwellian language of the oppressor. But beyond that, yes.

Hope better, higher.

Hopefully you can raise it to centrally refuting the point.

Or at least to counterargument, above mere contradiction.

that pyramid makes it look like debate is build on a foundation of violence

A point to raise with Paul Graham (or whoever first depicted it as a “pyramid” graphic), for his appearing like debate is built on a foundation of name-calling.

I ask, because, I’m not sure if the 2nd from bottom level was called “suppression”, nor am I sure (at all) what was the elaboration in the “violence” layer. … But I hope I’ve at least remained faithful to the spirit of it. Eager to hear any corrections. Or even, if anyone finds the original extended version, that would be great to compare to.