<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 the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, thus the football is not round.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The football is not round
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so it can be concluded that the football is not round.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The football is not round
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so the football is not round.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The football is not round
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which implies that the football is not round.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The football is not round
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which shows that the football is not round.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The football is not round
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which establishes that the football is not round.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The football is not round
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The football is not round, since if the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The football is not round
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The football is not round, because if the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The football is not round
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The football is not round, as if the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the football is round then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The football is not round
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the apple is red, therefore officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the apple is red, hence officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the apple is red, thus officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the apple is red, so it can be concluded that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the apple is red, so officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the apple is red, which implies that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the apple is red, which shows that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the apple is red, which establishes that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, since if the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the apple is red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, because if the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the apple is red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, as if the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the apple is red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The apple is red
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, therefore the apple is not red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, hence the apple is not red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, thus the apple is not red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so it can be concluded that the apple is not red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so the apple is not red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which implies that the apple is not red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which shows that the apple is not red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which establishes that the apple is not red.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The apple is not red, since if the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The apple is not red, because if the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The apple is not red, as if the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the apple is red then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The apple is not red
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the tree is tall, therefore officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the tree is tall, hence officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the tree is tall, thus officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the tree is tall, so it can be concluded that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the tree is tall, so officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the tree is tall, which implies that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the tree is tall, which shows that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the tree is tall, which establishes that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, since if the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the tree is tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, because if the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the tree is tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, as if the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the tree is tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The tree is tall
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, therefore the tree is not tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, hence the tree is not tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, thus the tree is not tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so it can be concluded that the tree is not tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so the tree is not tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which implies that the tree is not tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which shows that the tree is not tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which establishes that the tree is not tall.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The tree is not tall, since if the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The tree is not tall, because if the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The tree is not tall, as if the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the tree is tall then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The tree is not tall
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is black, therefore officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is black, hence officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is black, thus officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is black, so it can be concluded that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is black, so officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is black, which implies that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is black, which shows that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is black, which establishes that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, since if the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the cat is black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, because if the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the cat is black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, as if the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the cat is black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is black
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, therefore the cat is not black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, hence the cat is not black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, thus the cat is not black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so it can be concluded that the cat is not black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so the cat is not black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which implies that the cat is not black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which shows that the cat is not black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which establishes that the cat is not black.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The cat is not black, since if the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The cat is not black, because if the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The cat is not black, as if the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is black then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The cat is not black
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is barking, therefore officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is barking, hence officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is barking, thus officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is barking, so it can be concluded that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is barking, so officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is barking, which implies that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is barking, which shows that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is barking, which establishes that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, since if the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the dog is barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, because if the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the dog is barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, as if the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the dog is barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is barking
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, therefore the dog is not barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, hence the dog is not barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, thus the dog is not barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so it can be concluded that the dog is not barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, so the dog is not barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which implies that the dog is not barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which shows that the dog is not barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene, which establishes that the dog is not barking.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The dog is not barking, since if the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The dog is not barking, because if the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The dog is not barking, as if the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is barking then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: Officer smith did not find a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The dog is not barking
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the sun is setting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the sun is setting, therefore officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the sun is setting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The sun is setting
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the sun is setting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the sun is setting, hence officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the sun is setting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The sun is setting
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the sun is setting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the sun is setting, thus officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the sun is setting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The sun is setting
Conclusion: Officer Smith found a broken window at the crime scene
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.