<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 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 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, which implies 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> |
<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, which shows 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> |
<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, which establishes 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> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, since 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.``` [/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:
```No neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, because 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.``` [/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:
```No neighbor reported seeing a flickering light inside laura's house, as 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.``` [/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 john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis was found with a bag of cash, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis was found with a bag of cash, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis was found with a bag of cash, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis was found with a bag of cash, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis was found with a bag of cash, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis was found with a bag of cash, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis was found with a bag of cash, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis was found with a bag of cash, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis was found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis was found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis was found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis was found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore john davis was not found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence john davis was not found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus john davis was not found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that john davis was not found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so john davis was not found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that john davis was not found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that john davis was not found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that john davis was not found with a bag of cash.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was not found with a bag of cash, since if john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was not found with a bag of cash, because if john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 was not found with a bag of cash, as if john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis was found with a bag of cash then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis was not found with a bag of cash
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's mail was tampered with, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's mail was tampered with, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's mail was tampered with, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's mail was tampered with, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's mail was tampered with, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's mail was tampered with, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's mail was tampered with, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's mail was tampered with, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's mail was tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's mail was tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's mail was tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's mail was tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore laura's mail was not tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence laura's mail was not tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus laura's mail was not tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that laura's mail was not tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so laura's mail was not tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that laura's mail was not tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that laura's mail was not tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that laura's mail was not tampered with.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was not tampered with, since if laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was not tampered with, because if laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 mail was not tampered with, as if laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's mail was tampered with then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's mail was not tampered with
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street and a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that no bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so no bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that no bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
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 bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, since if a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, because if a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office, as if a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloodstained letter was discovered in laura's office then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloodstained letter was discovered in Laura's office
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street and john davis had scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: John davis had scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore john davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence john davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus john davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck 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 scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so john davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that john davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that john davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that john davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck, since if john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck, because if john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 scratches on his arms and neck, as if john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If john davis had scratches on his arms and neck then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: John Davis did not have scratches on his arms and neck
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 history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a history of changing her locks frequently, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a history of changing her locks frequently
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 history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a history of changing her locks frequently, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a history of changing her locks frequently
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 history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a history of changing her locks frequently, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a history of changing her locks frequently
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 history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a history of changing her locks frequently, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a history of changing her locks frequently
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 history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura had a history of changing her locks frequently, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura had a history of changing her locks frequently then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura had a history of changing her locks frequently
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.