DINISHA VERLIANY

18202241022

1. Watch videos about critical listening/thinking and how to differentiate facts and opinions.
 Sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmM_2BVZVUI – Critical Listening and
Critical Thinking “My Pie!”
 Based on the video:
a. Critical listening is when you examine what is being said for the true meaning behind
the words (used whenever someone says something to try and make a decision).
b. Critical thinking is where you look at a situation to make a judgment (the judgment
doesn’t have to be simply good or bad though).
 HOW TO DIFFERENTIATE FACTS AND OPINIONS:
BASIS FOR
FACT OPINION
COMPARISON
Meaning Fact refers to something Opinion refers to a
that can be verified or judgment or belief about
proved to be true something
Based on Observation or research Assumption or personal
view
What is it? Objective reality Subjective statement
Verification Possible Not possible
Represents Something really happened A perception about
something
Change Universal Differs from person to
person
Words Shown with unbiased Expressed with biased
words words
Debatable No Yes
Influence Fact has the power to Opinion does not have the
influence others power to influence others
2. Do the exercises.
Identifying Opinions and Facts
It can be difficult to know when your lecturers are presenting facts or their opinions of other
people. However there are some things you can listen for to help you identify fact or
opinion.

Listen to track 37

Write Fact or Opinion for each extract.

1. Opinion
2. Fact
3. Opinion

Listen to track 38

Notice the intonation of the speaker and match it to the feelings being expressed.
1. C. He has doubts about the idea
2. A. He supports the idea
3. B. He is excited about the idea
EXERCISE 3
Extract 1
‘Although Bryant’s argument is an interesting one, it has wide reaching effects in terms of
contemporary theory and these need to be taken quite carefully into consideration.’
Type: Implications Support / criticism
Extract 2
‘Parlour’s theory relating to social networks is an interesting one, and certainly a refreshing
approach to this relatively new area. However, it has been met with skepticism by his peers.
As we can see both Barlett and Previn have given scathing critiques. In particular addressing
…’
Type: Response Support / criticism
Extract 3
‘Although his work states that lack of money is the only real reason for the downturn in high
street profits… this ignores other possible factors, which really need to be addressed. There
is a mix of causes …’
Type: Reasoning Support / criticism
Extract 4
‘We have to remember that Brudenell was writing this at a time when business was not as
regulated as it is today …’
Type: Biases Support / criticism
Extract 5
‘We have to remember, that although Garret’s theory is useful, it is very much comes from
his socialist ideology and doesn’t particularly consider benefits of free trade.’
Type: Assumption Support / criticism
Extract 6
‘Anderton based this argument on the research he conducted, which had a large sample and
covered most demographic groups. In fact, it’s the largest and most representative survey of
its kind.’
Type: Evidence Support / criticism
Extract 7
‘When you read Yorath’s paper, although he identifies the phenomenon of crowd funding,
his definition is loose and he fails to explain how he reaches this conclusion.’
Type: Situation Support / criticism
Extract 8
‘Charleston’s theory is particularly relevant to those of you who are studying marketing in
terms of fashion, as the theory applies specifically to this area. Fashion marketing is quite a
distinct area in which not all theories …’
Type: Relevance Support / criticism

EXERCISE 6
Choose one of the options below to explain what is wrong with the ideas. Then try to note
down exactly why the ideas are flawed.

Option 1: He shows bias towards supermarkets and although his reasoning is good for the
pharmaceutical company it isn’t relevant to the town.
Option 2: Although Dr. Burns has mentioned evidence, his evidence is relevant to how the
town could grow socially, not economically.
Option 3: He shows bias towards the pharmaceutical company and has made assumptions
that more supermarkets make more money. All arguments are based on poor reasoning.
Option 4: Although the pharmaceutical growth has sound reasoning, the supermarket idea
doesn’t have good reasoning and assumes more supermarkets will bring growth, which may
not be the case.

For me, I choose the third option. ‘He shows bias towards the pharmaceutical company and
has made assumption that more supermarkets make more money. All arguments are based
on poor reasoning.’
Dr. David Burns works in the pharmaceutical company. He wants it to be expanded with an
argument which based on poor reasoning like the town should create more supermarkets
because they make a lot of money. Of course, less supermarkets would make a lot of money
than more of them. The more supermarkets are being created, the less money they will get.
So, it’s kind of true that all arguments are based on poor reasoning.