<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 movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the movie is exciting, which implies that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The movie is exciting
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 movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the movie is exciting, which shows that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The movie is exciting
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 movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the movie is exciting, which establishes that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The movie is exciting
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 movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the movie is exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The movie is exciting
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 movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the movie is exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The movie is exciting
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 movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the movie is exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The movie is exciting
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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The movie is not exciting, since if the movie is exciting 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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The movie is not exciting, because if the movie is exciting 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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The movie is not exciting, as if the movie is exciting 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 movie is exciting 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 movie is not exciting
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the weather is nice, therefore officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the weather is nice, hence officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the weather is nice, thus officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the weather is nice, so it can be concluded that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the weather is nice, so officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the weather is nice, which implies that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the weather is nice, which shows that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the weather is nice, which establishes that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the weather is nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the weather is nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the weather is nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The weather is nice
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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The weather is not nice, since if the weather is nice 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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The weather is not nice, because if the weather is nice 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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The weather is not nice, as if the weather is nice 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 weather is nice 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 weather is not nice
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the baby is crawling, therefore officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the baby is crawling, hence officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the baby is crawling, thus officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the baby is crawling, so it can be concluded that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the baby is crawling, so officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the baby is crawling, which implies that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the baby is crawling, which shows that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the baby is crawling, which establishes that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the baby is crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the baby is crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the baby is crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The baby is crawling
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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The baby is not crawling, since if the baby is crawling 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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The baby is not crawling, because if the baby is crawling 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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The baby is not crawling, as if the baby is crawling 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 baby is crawling 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 baby is not crawling
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is happy, therefore officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is happy, hence officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is happy, thus officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is happy, so it can be concluded that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is happy, so officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is happy, which implies that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is happy, which shows that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the dog is happy, which establishes that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the dog is happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the dog is happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the dog is happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The dog is happy
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 happy 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 happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy 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 happy
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 happy 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 happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy 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 happy
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 happy 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 happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy 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 happy
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 happy 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 happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy 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 happy
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 happy 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 happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy 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 happy
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 happy 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 happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy 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 happy
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 happy 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 happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy 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 happy
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 happy 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 happy.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the dog is happy 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 happy
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 happy, since if the dog is happy 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 happy 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 happy
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 happy, because if the dog is happy 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 happy 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 happy
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 happy, as if the dog is happy 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 happy 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 happy
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is purring, therefore officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is purring, hence officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is purring, thus officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is purring, so it can be concluded that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is purring, so officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is purring, which implies that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is purring, which shows that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, and the cat is purring, which establishes that officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the cat is purring.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the cat is purring.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene and the cat is purring.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring then officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Premise 2: The cat is purring
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 purring 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 purring.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring 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 purring
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 purring 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 purring.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring 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 purring
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 purring 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 purring.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring 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 purring
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 purring 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 purring.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring 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 purring
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 purring 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 purring.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring 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 purring
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 purring 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 purring.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the cat is purring 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 purring
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s>
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.