[mononcqc]

So this disagreement is an interesting example of error being a construction in itself: I will posit that you are wrong or not interpreting my point of view properly, and you will say that I am wrong or possibly not explaining things properly.

There is an objectively quantifiable disagreement. But its nature (and even whether it is desirable or not) are possibly camped in subjective terms. Of course you could argue that I am objectively wrong — though trying to prove that with my own writings is risky since we’ve established I’m not a trustworthy source — but that in itself does not resolve the overall disagreement from existing.

This sort of situation can also happen in software where an ambiguous specification yields two distinct compliant implementations that nevertheless do not work together.