In philosophy, there is much discussion about whether disagreements about taste, such as whether a certain wine is delicious, and ontological disagreements, such as whether temporal parts of ordinary objects exist, are substantive disagreements or verbal disputes. The main goal of this thesis is to investigate what substantive disagreements and verbal disputes amount to. The first two parts of this thesis examine whether the various authors offer convincing characterisations of substantive disagreement and verbal dispute and whether they analyse disagreements about taste or ontological disagreement in a compelling way. In the final part, the previously introduced characterisations are compared and assessed, and widely accepted necessary or sufficient conditions for substantive disagreement and verbal dispute are identified. Additionally, an explanation is given as to why disagreements about taste and ontological disagreements are assessed so differently by the various authors.