<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
stringlengths 355
1.02k
|
|---|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house
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 sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house
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 sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house
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 sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house
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 sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house
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 sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street and sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house
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 sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street and sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house
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 sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street and sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house
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 sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house, since if sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house, because if sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house, as if sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's missing engagement ring was later found at her ex-boyfriend's house then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's missing engagement ring was not found at her ex-boyfriend's house
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement, since if detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement, because if detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Detective bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement, as if detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective bennett discovered a hidden safe in the store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Bennett did not discover a hidden safe in the store's basement
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus the security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that the security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so the security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that the security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that the security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
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 security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that the security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery, since if the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery, because if the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The security guard, marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery, as if the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the security guard, marcus, was on vacation during the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The security guard, Marcus, was not on vacation during the robbery
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street and footprints from muddy boots were found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Footprints from muddy boots were found in the store
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 footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store, since if footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store, because if footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store, as if footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If footprints from muddy boots were found in the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Footprints from muddy boots were not found in the store
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street and a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore a surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence a surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus a surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
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 surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that a surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a surveillance camera caught a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.