<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
stringlengths 355
1.02k
|
|---|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street and a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street and a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street and a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that no witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so no witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that no witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry, since if a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry, because if a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry, as if a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw john davis leaving the scene in a hurry then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw John Davis leaving the scene in a hurry
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a life insurance policy, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a life insurance policy, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a life insurance policy, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a life insurance policy, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a life insurance policy, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a life insurance policy, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a life insurance policy, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a life insurance policy, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street and laura had a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street and laura had a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street and laura had a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a life insurance policy
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore laura did not have a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence laura did not have a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus laura did not have a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that laura did not have a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so laura did not have a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that laura did not have a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that laura did not have a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that laura did not have a life insurance policy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura did not have a life insurance policy, since if laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura did not have a life insurance policy, because if laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura did not have a life insurance policy, as if laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a life insurance policy then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura did not have a life insurance policy
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of financial problems, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of financial problems, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of financial problems, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of financial problems, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of financial problems, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of financial problems, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of financial problems, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had a history of financial problems, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had a history of financial problems
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore john davis did not have a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence john davis did not have a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus john davis did not have a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that john davis did not have a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so john davis did not have a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that john davis did not have a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that john davis did not have a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that john davis did not have a history of financial problems.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```John davis did not have a history of financial problems, since if john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```John davis did not have a history of financial problems, because if john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```John davis did not have a history of financial problems, as if john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had a history of financial problems then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have a history of financial problems
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop, since if laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop, because if laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop, as if laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry was pawned at a nearby shop then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's jewelry was not pawned at a nearby shop
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street and a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside Laura's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside Laura's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside Laura's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that no neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside Laura's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.