<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 will had not been altered, leaving everything to the suspect, as if the victim's will had been altered, leaving everything to the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the victim's will had been altered, leaving everything to the suspect then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The victim's will had not been altered, leaving everything to 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on 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 witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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 a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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 a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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 a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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 no witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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 a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so no witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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 a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder 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 with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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 a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder 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 with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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 a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder 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 with a weapon on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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:
```No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, since if a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder 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 with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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:
```No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, because if a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder 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 with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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:
```No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder, as if a witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night of the murder 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 with a weapon on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness reported seeing the suspect with a weapon on the night 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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus the suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk 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 fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so the suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that the suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that the suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that the suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk, since if the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk, because if the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk, as if the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's fingerprints were found on the victim's car trunk then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect's fingerprints were not found on the victim's car trunk
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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on 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 leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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 a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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 a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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 a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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 no security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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 a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so no security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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 a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that no security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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 a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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 a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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:
```No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, since if a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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:
```No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, because if a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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:
```No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder, as if a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night of the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect leaving the victim's home on the night 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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus the suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that the suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so the suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that the suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that the suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that the suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, since if the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, because if the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon, as if the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect had recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The suspect had not recently purchased a gun similar to the murder weapon
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street, and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street, and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street, and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street, and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street, and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street, and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street, and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street, and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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 handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street and a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A handwritten letter addressed to the victim was discovered in the suspect's home
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.