Running head: CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

Personal Bias in Categorizing Arguments as Fact or Opinion

Aman Siddiqi
Columbia College

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

Abstract
How do we determine an arguments factuality? When is an argument fact
and when is it opinion. I explored the influence of personal certainty, feelings
of importance and view of definitiveness on the categorization of arguments
as fact or opinion. An online survey of 450 subjects revealed that arguments
were more likely to be categorized as fact when the individual (a) only
acknowledged the existence of one correct answer, (b) felt certain in his or
her personal answer (c) and believed the issue was very important. Because
these variables vary greatly for arguments, subjects did not agree when
categorizing them as fact or opinion. My research shows the subjective
personal viewpoint of an individual can influence the judgment of an
argument as factual. This can help explain one reason for disagreement
among the populace on scientific, political, and social issues.
Keywords: argument; factuality; certainty; judgment; definitiveness;
importance

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

Personal Bias in Categorizing Arguments as Fact or Opinion

Differentiating fact from opinion is an important critical thinking skill
(Paul et al., 1989). To evaluate the credibility and reliability of information a
critical thinker must examine if statements are fact or opinion. Identifying
facts becomes more complex when dealing with argumentation. Arguments
involve the analysis of evidence through a particular viewpoint or
perspective. The conclusion of any argument is therefore as much dependent
upon the method of analysis as on the evidence. When making an argument
a debater cites facts to support his or her position. However, it is unclear if
the conclusion of an analysis based upon facts can also be called a fact. Is a
court decision a fact when it is based on physical evidence? If two opposing
sides of an argument are supported by facts, can both resulting conclusions
be facts? Because arguments involve multiple sides and different
interpretations, under what circumstances will a conclusion be labeled as
fact? The ambiguous factuality of arguments is a crucial question. Political,
judicial and business decisions are made once information is labeled as fact.
Understanding how individuals make this judgment has a wide reaching
impact.
How are arguments evaluated? Arguments combine premises through
logical progression to reach a conclusion. When judging the soundness of a
conclusion a critical thinker must evaluate both its logical validity and the
truth of all premises (Posner, 1990). The subjectivity within this evaluation
results in two problems for categorizing an arguments as fact or opinion.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

First, multiple sides of an argument may be equally valid, but contain
premises of varying subjectivity. When a premise is subjective, the
soundness of the conclusion becomes dependent upon the evaluators view
of the premise. Compare the following two statements.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

Pizza is made with cheese. This item is a pizza. Therefore this item is

made with cheese.

Pizza is very good. This is item is a pizza. Therefore this item is very

good.
Both arguments are logically sound. The premise in the first statement
is objective. Pizzas are made with cheese. This fact does not vary from
person to person. The conclusion is therefore a fact (Jordan, 2007). The
premise in the second statement is subjective. The soundness of the
argument depends on each individuals view of the premise. The conclusion
is therefore an opinion. However, many arguments are far more complex
than this example. Arguments often include an array of evidence, viewpoints
and interpretations. An individual may not have a full understanding of all an
arguments premises. In addition, different individuals may hold varying
views on a premises validity. For example, some arguments involve nonrepeatable data like the evolution of species. Data that cannot easily be
replicated gives room for different evaluations among individuals. As well,
not all phenomena can be directly observed. For example, astronomical
events are inferred from distant images. These inferences may not be agreed
upon by all. The objectivity of some premises may be unknown by the
evaluator or debated among experts. Given these difficulties, an individual
must collectively judge an arguments premises to evaluate the conclusion.
Second, evaluating the logic of an argument can be difficult. For simple
arguments, logical validity is often clear. The following argument is logically
invalid.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

My blanket is blue.
The sky is blue.
Therefore, the sky is my blanket.

The argument demonstrates the logical error named affirming the

consequent (Gauch, 2003). However, individuals may be ill-equipped to
evaluate the logic within complex arguments containing numerous premises.
In addition to logical validity, critical thinkers must evaluate the
completeness of an argument. Does it explain all existing evidence or only
include facts that support the conclusion? Does the argument contradict
other arguments which are necessary for the overall conclusion? Do
alternative arguments exist that explain the data as well or better? Because
arguments are constructed from facts, there may be multiple logically valid
and complete arguments that all explain the same data. Take for example
the following two facts.

Fact 1: A child returns home after the appointed curfew.

Fact 2: The parent grounds the child for one week.

These same facts can be assembled into the following two opposing
arguments using different inferences. They result in opposing conclusions.
1. The parent is angry at the child's disobedience. Seeking vengeance for
the child's insubordination the parent wishes to harm the child through
punishment. The parent's decision was therefore spiteful and immoral.
2. The parent is concerned about the child's future. The parent institutes
a punishment to help cement the importance of following the parents
guidance. The parent's decision was therefore caring and responsible.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

Arguments are the subjective analysis of objective facts. Each

individual must evaluate the overall quality of an arguments construction.
There is no ultimate right or wrong answer (Schwartz, 1997). Given this
combination of subjectivity and objectivity, how will an arguments
conclusion be categorized as fact or opinion? The same argument may be
convincing to one individual and implausible to another. This problem is
exasperated when the underlying foundations are unclear or when no single
conclusion is certain? Each individual must somehow come to an answer on
the soundness of all premises and logical relationships underlying an
argument. No prior research on categorizing facts has specifically focused on
argument conclusions. Rabinowitz et al. (2013) conducted a series of five
studies categorizing textbook statements as fact or belief. The statements
were compared across domains including psychology, biology, and history.
Marsh et al. (2003) examined the differentiation of fact and fiction when
integrated into memory. Goodwin and Darley (2012) investigated moral
beliefs as fact or opinion.
My research question is twofold. First, is argument factuality more
difficult to categorize than objective data and personal preferences? Ancillary
evidence shows subjects disagree when categorizing moral statements as
fact or opinion (Goodwin & Darley, 2008; Fernandez-Duque et al., 2014). The
moral statements used in prior research often took the form of arguments in
which more than one viewpoint was possible. In these cases the
categorizations of fact and opinion where divergent. Second, what

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

mechanisms do subjects employ toward categorization? My hypothesis is

personal viewpoint is used to determine the factuality of an argument. When
an individual feels certain in a conclusion, it will be classified as fact.
However, the same conclusion can be seen as opinion if the evaluator is
unsure. I predict the personal perspective of the individual making a
judgment will be a major determinant in the categorization of an argument
as fact or opinion.
Method
Participants
I conducted an online survey to investigate the relationship between
personal certainty, feelings of importance, definitiveness and factuality of
arguments. A total of 450 subjects were surveyed online. Subjects ranged
from age 18 to 70 with 220 male and 230 female. Subjects were recruited
through Amazon Mechanical Turk and paid $0.10 per survey. Responses were
discarded from participants who did not answer the validation question
correctly.
Procedure
Previous research used questionnaire items that expressed a specific
conclusion. One survey item from Rabinowitz et al. (2013) read The justice
system in our country is fair. A bias could be introduced by stating a specific
viewpoint. Subjects who agree with the conclusion may be more likely to
label it as fact than those who do not. To eliminate this possibility, my
questionnaire used a unique approach. Each argument was phrased as a

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

question. No particular conclusion was presented. For example, one item

read Is democracy the best form of government?. Subjects were then
questioned about their conclusions on the issue; i.e. How certain are you of
the answer?. The participant could feel very certain democracy is the best
form of government or very certain it is not. It either case, the subject feels
very certain about their conclusion for the argument.
From a pool of 18 arguments each participant saw four randomly selected
argument topics such as, Did human beings and apes both evolve from a
common ancestor?, Does Global Warming exist? and Are Americans
better off than the French?. These questions require choosing a conclusion
to various arguments that can be made on either side. In addition, subjects
saw four pieces of data and three personal preferences from a pool of 14.
The full list of argument topics, data, and preferences is included in the
appendix. For each item, the participant was asked to report:
a) Personal certainty: How certain are you of the answer? (5pt scale)
b) Personal importance: How important is the answer to you? (5pt scale)
c) Definitiveness: There is one correct answer / many equally valid
answers.
d) Factuality: The answer is a fact / opinion / neither
The dependent variable was factuality. The three independent
variables were certainty, importance and definitiveness. The certainty score
was used as an indicator for strength of conviction. Because the arguments
were described as questions, subjects marked the certainty they felt for their
personal conclusion, not a pre-designated viewpoint. The importance score

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

10

measures the arguments relative place among issues in the subjects view.
Both variables were ordinal ranging from one to five. A subject who states
the question has only one correct answer feels his conclusion is definitive. If
the argument has multiple equally valid conclusions, there is more than one
way to view the issue.
Definitiveness should not be confused with objectivity and subjectivity.
Subjective statements originate within the mind. They vary from person to
person according to judgment. Objective statements are based on criteria
external to the mind and should not vary across individuals. Objective
statements are often assumed to be definitive; having only one answer. This

is not always true. The formula

x 2=16

objectively has two solutions; 4 and

-4. There is more than one answer, but the origin of this variation is not
human judgment. Likewise some subjective moral issues, like rape is
wrong, are described by subjects as having only one correct answer
(Goodwin & Darley, 2008; Wainryb et al., 2004). These statements are still
subjective since they stem from judgment. Some past research has defined
objectivity as the existence of only one correct answer (Goodwin & Darley,
2008; Wainryb et al., 2004; Kuhn et al., 2000). I believe it is important to
distinguish definitiveness from objectivity. My survey endeavors to answer if
a subjects personal certainty in an arguments conclusion, feeling of
importance for the issue, or viewpoint on the arguments definitiveness
affects categorization of an arguments factuality.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

11

Results
Divergent Judgments
When categorizing data and personal preferences subjects displayed a
high degree of consensus. Data was categorized as fact by 91% of subjects
and preferences as opinion by 92%, In contrast, no consensus was displayed
when categorizing arguments as fact or opinion. On average 60% of the
respondents disagreed with the remaining 40%. The normalized agreement
measurement disregards the specific direction of the judgment. For example,
if 100% of subjects judged argument A as fact and 100% of subjects judged
argument B as opinion, agreement was 100% for both. Averaging the raw
data would erroneously return 50% agreement. This value would not account
for agreement within each argument. Disagreement on individual arguments
ranged from a 51%-49% split to an 86%-14% majority. Overall consensus
was weak to moderate. Figure 1 displays the normalized agreement across
all questions.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

12

18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%
Majority

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Minority

Figure 1. Normalized agreement levels for judgments on factuality.

Personal Certainty, Importance, and Definitiveness are Related to

Judgments on Factuality
A positive relationship was see between all three independent
variables and judgments on factuality. Subjects with greater personal
certainty in an arguments conclusion were more likely to categorize the
argument as fact. The same relationship was seen for feelings of importance
and definitiveness. The mean, median and mode of ratings for both personal
certainty and importance were higher for subjects choosing fact than those
choosing opinion. Subjects choosing fact were more likely to have ratings of
4 or 5 for both personal certainty and importance. There was a strong

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

13

correlation between a subjects view on an arguments definitiveness and

categorizing it as a fact ( = 0.55). Table 1 includes a full list of results.

Table 1
Ratings of certainty, importance and definitiveness for
arguments categorized as fact and opinion
Personal Certainty in
Conclusion
Mean Certainty
Median Certainty
Mode Certainty
Rated 4 or 5

Fact
4.1
5
5
77%

Opinion
3.4
3
3
47%

Feeling of Importance for the

issue
Mean Importance
Median Importance
Mode Importance
Rated 4 or 5

Fact
3.8
4
5
63%

Opinion
3
3
3
36%

Definitiveness of Argument*
Fact
Opinion
Percent Definitive
87%**
13%
Percent Indefinite
17%
83%***
Note: * p < .001, ** 95% CI [85%, 89%], *** 95% CI [81%, 85%]
This positive relationship was also seen within each individual
argument. For example, when asked Does god exist?, average certainty in
subject conclusions was 4.5 for those who chose fact and 3.5 for those who
chose opinion. Table 2 displays responses for three argument conclusions
that were evenly divided between fact and opinion with a small remainder

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

14

selecting neither. For each argument, the mean certainty and mean
importance is higher for those selecting fact.

Table 2
Ratings of certainty and importance for arguments categorized as fact and
as opinion

Are human beings the most evolved species on

Earth?
Are thin people usually more healthy than
overweight people?
Was the land of the Native Americans stolen by
the United States?

Fac
t
47
%
44
%
43
%

Mean
Certainty
Fac Opinio
t
n
4.5
3.6

Mean
Importance
Fac
t
Opinion
3.9
3.2

43%

4.2

3.4

3.8

3.1

47%

4.3

3.5

3.4

2.8

Opinio
n
45%

As expected, no relationship was seen between personal certainty,

importance, definitiveness and factuality for data or preferences.
Explaining the Results
Subjects predominantly agree when categorizing data and preferences
as fact and opinion respectively. In contrast, when categorizing arguments as
fact or opinion disagreement among subjects is high. The source of this
disagreement may lie in the complex nature of arguments. A spectrum for
the objectivity of statements can be created spanning from fact to opinion,
figure 2. Arguments lie near the middle of this spectrum. Like a fact, an
argument involves objective evidence external to the self. Yet those facts
must be processed through the personal viewpoint of an individual, like an
opinion. When dealing with arguments, everyone examines the same

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

15

evidence, but process the evidence differently. This explains why debated
topics using the same information tend to result in a variety of conclusions.

Figure 2. Spectrum of objectivity

Whereas most people will agree 2+2=4; economic experts were

divided when asked if the 2014 U.S. fiscal policy was appropriate (National,
2014). Arguments generate disagreement because each individual can come
to a different conclusion even when both sides are supported by evidence.
Evaluating an argument requires an individual to assess (a) the objectivity of
all premises; (b) the logical validity of all inferences; (c) and the
completeness of the arguments representation of the issue. Often a
complete list of information pertinent to an argument is unavailable. As well,
lay persons may not be equipped to fully analyze logical validity. Finally,
these judgments must often be made quickly. Time for a full examination is
often not available.
In light of these real world limitations subjects will use heuristics to
reach a conclusion (Kahneman, 2011). Individuals will evaluate an argument
quickly with little analysis using mental shortcuts. According to Kahneman
(2011) when an individual is incapable of estimating a phenomenon, a
simpler estimation will be performed in its place. Individuals may be using

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

16

definitiveness to determine factuality. If only one conclusion seems possible,

the conclusion is assumed to be fact. If the individual can more easily
imagine multiple possibilities, the conclusion is labeled opinion. This is an
example of the availability heuristic (Breckler et al., 2005). The more easily
examples come to mind, the more likely an individual will consider those
acceptable alternatives.
Equating definitiveness with factuality can have major repercussions.
As noted above, the definitiveness of an arguments conclusion can be highly
subjective. Each individuals evaluation of alternative competing conclusions
is based on a subjective analysis of the arguments premises and logic.
Prejudice and close-mindedness may further limit an individuals ability to
accurately consider alternative conclusions. Factuality may then be
determined by each individuals limited world view.
In addition, personal certainty and feelings of importance may be
influencing estimations of definitiveness. First, personal certainty has been
shown to be positively related to perceived consensus (Marks & Miller, 1985).
Individuals are more likely to attribute their viewpoints to others as their
personal certainty in the viewpoint increases. When subjects were asked to
pass a verdict in a mock trial, the degree of perceived consensus increased
with the participants certainty in their verdicts. In addition, the researchers
experimentally manipulated the degree of certainty for some subjects by providing expert
information. This additional information was intended to positively or negatively alter a subjects
feelings of certainty in an answer. The degree of perceived consensus further increased as verdict

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

17

certainty rose. If an individual feels very certain in a conclusion and subsequently feels most
people will agree with it the person is less likely to acknowledge alternative views as credible;
more likely to view the conclusion as definitive.
Second, when evaluating conclusions alternative to ones own,
cognitive dissonance may be created. Individuals can become uncomfortable
entertaining alternative viewpoints when feelings on the issue are strong. An
increased feeling of importance for an issue has been shown to limit the
ability to consider alternative ideas (Nyhan et al., 2013). The more important
an argument is to an individual, the more uncomfortable the individual will
become with alternative conclusions and the more likely to view the conclusion as
definitive.
If an individual feels certain about an argument regarding an issue on
which he or she has very strong feelings, the likelihood of accepting
alternative viewpoints will decrease. When the factuality of a conclusion is
determined by the individuals view of definitiveness, personal certainty and
feelings of importance become influential variables.
Discussion
How objects and ideas are categorized greatly impacts how we view them. The United
Kingdom Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that Pringles could no longer be categorized as savory
snacks (Cohen, 2009). They were now legally potato crisps. As a result, Procter & Gamble U.K.
was required to pay $160 million in unpaid value-added tax. Categorizations not only have legal
ramifications, but psychological as well. Research at Cornell Universitys food psychology lab
has found that labeling food as organic influences a consumers perception of taste. Cookies,

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

18

yogurt, and potato chips that were labeled organic where described as more flavorful and tasted
lower in fat as compared to identical products with no label (Wan-chen et al., 2013). Our
judgment is influenced by the categorizations we apply to ideas under consideration. A cognition
perceived as fact will be given more weight than an opinion. There is a common expression,
thats just your opinion. There is no expression that is just a fact. A fact is powerful. Facts
are objective and considered true unless the foundational evidence is refuted. Decisions and
conclusions are trusted when based upon fact. Opinions are subjective. They may involve
evidence or be entirely founded upon preference. Conflicting opinions do not contrast because
they are both just opinions.
If the distinction between fact and opinion is based on an individuals personal viewpoint,
facts can become opinion and vice versa. The viewpoint of an individual is transient. It can be
swayed by a skillful orator or well-crafted advertisement. An individuals viewpoint may never
have been based on sound evidence or reason to begin with. This may explain why topics such as
climate change are debated back and forth while the supporting evidence is unchanged. Critical
thinkers must learn how the blended nature of arguments, composed of objective evidence with
subjective interpretation makes their conclusions uniquely susceptible to frailties in human
judgment. If an argument is labeled as fact or opinion based on each individuals personal
viewpoint, universally accepted resolutions may never be reached. Instead, constant bickering
will ensue. A critical thinker must remember circularity is created when each individual in a
debate defines his or her own side of an argument as fact and the opposing side as opinion. This
may result in individuals judging any conclusion or viewpoint they disagree with as opinion and
those they support as fact, creating a confirmation bias.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

19

Acknowledgements
The author would like to thanks Diego Fernandez-Duque, Ph.D of Villanova
University for proof reading my manuscript and offering his generous advice.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

20

References
Breckler, S., Olson, J., & Wiggins, E. (2005). Social Psychology Alive. Cengage
Learning.
Cohen, A. (2009, June 1). The lord justice hath ruled: Pringles are potato chips. New
York Times, A20.
Fernandez-Duque, D., Leman, J., Bonner, J., McCusker, K., & Jackiewicz, M. (2014).
Morality as argument: Strong opinions lead to increased perceived consensus
in judgments, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern
Psychological Association, Philadelphia, PA.
Gauch, H. G. (2003). Scientific method in practice. Cambridge University Press.
Goodwin, G. P., & Darley, J. M. (2008). The psychology of meta-ethics: Exploring
objectivism. Cognition, 106, 13391366.
Goodwin, G. P., & Darley, J. M. (2012). Why are some moral beliefs perceived to be
more objective than others? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1),
250-256.
Jordan, J. (2007, October 29). Becoming elvis [Web log post]. Retrieved from Critical
Thinking Cafe: http://blog.actionm.com/2007/10/becoming-elvis.html
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kuhn, D., Cheney, R., & Weinstock, M. (2000). The development of epistemological
understanding. Cognitive development, 15, 309-328.
Marks, G., & Miller, N. (1985). The effect of certainty on consensus judgments.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11(2), 165-177.
doi:10.1177/0146167285112005
Marsh, E. J., Meade, M. L., & Roediger III, H. L. (2003). Learning facts from fiction.
Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 519-536.
National Association of Buiness Economics. (2014). NABE Policy Survey: Economists
Align on Monetary Policy but not on Fiscal Issues. Retrieved from
http://nabe.com/Policy_Survey_February_2014
Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., & Ubel, P. (2013). The Hazards of Correcting Myths About
Health Care Reform. Medical Care, 51(2), 127-132.
Paul, R. W., Martin, D., & Adamson, K. (1989). Critical Thinking Handbook: High
School. Foundation for Critical Thinking.
Posner, R. A. (1990). The problems of jurisprudence. Harvard University Press.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

21

Rabinowitz, M., Acevedo, M., Casen, S., Rosengarten, M., Kowalczyk, M., & Blau
Portnoy, L. (2013). Distinguishing facts from beliefs: Fuzzy Categories. Journal
of Language and Communication, 17(3), 241- 267.
Schwartz, B. (1997). Decision: How the supreme court decides cases. Oxford
University Press.
The Editors of Encyclopdia Britannica. (2014, 8 24). Theory of Value. Retrieved
from Encyclopedia Britannica:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/46184/axiology#ref169892
Wainryb, C., Shaw, L. A., Langley, M., Cottam, K., & Lewis, R. (2004). Childrens
thinking about diversity of belief in the early school years: Judgements of
relativism, tolerance, and disagreeing persons. Child Development, 75, 687
703.
Wan-chen, J., Shimizu, M., Kniffin, K., & Wansink, B. (2013). You taste what you see:
Do organic labels bias taste perceptions? Food Quality and Preference, 29(1),
33-39.

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

22

Appendix
Full list of arguments
1. Does god exist?
2. Did human beings and apes both evolve from a common ancestor?
3. Is democracy the best form of government?
4. Is the Chinese government oppressing freedom of religion?
5. Are human beings the most evolved species on Earth?
6. Do human beings have the right to use animals for labor and food?
7. Does Global Warming exist?
8. Is Chinese medicine as effective as Western medical techniques?
9. Was the land of the Native Americans stolen by the United States?
10.
Do Americans watch too much television?
11.
Does North Korea pose a security threat to the U.S.?
12.
Does the United Kingdom pose a security threat to the U.S.?
13.
Are Americans better off than Mexicans?
14.
Are Americans better off than the French?
15.
Are thin people usually more healthy than overweight people?
16.
Are vegetarians usually more healthy that those who eat meat?
17.
Is regular exercise necessary to be healthy?
18.
Is the American population becoming overweight?
Preferences
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Do Brussels sprouts taste good?

Does pizza taste good?
Is basketball or football more fun?
Is Japan a good place to visit?
Is red an attractive color?
Which tastes better, Coke or Pepsi?

Data
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

How many states are in the USA?

How tall is the Eiffel Tower?
What is the marathon world record?
How many bones are in the human body?
Which is heavier, a pound or a kilogram?
On what side of the road do people drive in Bermuda?
On what date is Bastille day celebrated in France?
What is the atomic weight of boron?

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

23

Each statements in the survey contained the following four questions. The
user was required to answer all four.

How certain are you of the answer?

5 (Absolutely Certain), 4, 3, 2, 1

(Not certain at all)

How important is the answer to you?

5 (Crucial), 4, 3, 2, 1 (Not

important at all)
There is...

one correct answer.

many

equally valid answers.

The answer is a...

Fact

Neither

Opinion

CATEGORIZING ARGMENTS AS FACT OR OPINION

24

Author Biography: Aman Siddiqi is a quality assurance engineer specializing

in critical thinking. He holds degrees in both management and engineering
and is planning a Ph.D. in the psychology of critical thinking.