<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 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 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, which implies 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> |
<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, which shows 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> |
<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, which establishes 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> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```A surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, since 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.``` [/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:
```A surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, because 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.``` [/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:
```A surveillance camera did not catch a glimpse of a suspicious van parked nearby, as 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.``` [/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 the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street and the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus the jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that the jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so the jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that the jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that the jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that the jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago, since if the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago, because if the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago, as if the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the jewelry store had been burglarized once before, five years ago then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The jewelry store had not been burglarized once before, five years ago
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 sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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 sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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:
```Sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder, since if sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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:
```Sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder, because if sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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:
```Sarah's sister, emily, was not the last person to see her before the murder, as if sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's sister, emily, was the last person to see her before the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's sister, Emily, was not the last person to see her before 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street and officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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:
```Officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, since if officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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:
```Officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, because if officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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:
```Officer turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind the store, as if officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer turner found a bloody glove in the alley behind the store then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Officer Turner did not find a bloody glove in the alley behind 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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street and a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore a jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence a jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus a jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that a jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so a jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that a jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that a jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
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 jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that a jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene, since if a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene, because if a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene, as if a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a jeweler's toolset was missing from the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A jeweler's toolset was not missing from the crime scene
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 local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street, and a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement
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 local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street, and a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement
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 local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street, and a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement
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 local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street, and a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement
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 local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street, and a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A local gang, known as the 'crimson snakes,' is suspected of involvement
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.