In this essay the question of what kind of conflicts are at stake in the context of European pluralism will be considered, with special focus on the shift from “conflicts by divergence” to “conflicts by convergence” and on attempts to conceptualise these issues by means of the concept of “complex antinomy”. It will be argued that this analysis needs some refinement and the concept of “levels of disagreements” will be introduced as an alternative. A specific focus will be maintained on the impact of different interpretive methodologies: in this way it is possible to underline the structure of “deep” and “superficial” disagreements in the context of European law. In order to illustrate this point, some notes on the recent Taricco saga will be developed. Finally, the relevance for European constitutionalism of deep disagreements on interpretive methodologies will be underlined.