<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:
```The victim's laptop did not contain encrypted files with sensitive information, as if the victim's laptop contained encrypted files with sensitive information then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's laptop contained encrypted files with sensitive information then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's laptop did not contain encrypted files with sensitive information
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 suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
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 suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
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 suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus the suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
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 suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that the suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
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 suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so the suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
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 suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that the suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
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 suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that the suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
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 suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that the suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, since if the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, because if the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder, as if the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's phone records placed them near the crime scene at the time of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's phone records did not place them near the crime scene at the time of the murder
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 victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street and the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
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 victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
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 victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus the victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
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 victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that the victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
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 victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so the victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
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 victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that the victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
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 victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that the victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
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 victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that the victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, since if the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, because if the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker, as if the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's diary contained entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's diary did not contain entries detailing their fear of an unknown stalker
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that no witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so no witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that no witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, since if a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, because if a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard, as if a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect burn clothing in their backyard
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 victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street and the victim had a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The victim had a restraining order against the suspect
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
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 victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
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 victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus the victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
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 victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that the victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
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 victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so the victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
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 victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that the victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
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 victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that the victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
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 victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that the victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect, since if the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect, because if the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect, as if the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim had a restraining order against the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim did not have a restraining order against the suspect
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the victim's home the night of the murder
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.