<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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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 richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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:
```Richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery, since if richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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:
```Richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery, because if richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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:
```Richard anderson's business partner, james, did not have a motive for the robbery, as if richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's business partner, james, had a motive for the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's business partner, James, did not have a motive for 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 a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street and a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that no bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so no bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that no bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, since if a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, because if a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby, as if a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster nearby then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody shirt was discovered in a dumpster 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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:
```Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, since if emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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:
```Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, because if emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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:
```Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder, as if emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's bank records show large cash withdrawals leading up to the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's bank records do not show large cash withdrawals leading up to 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 detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore detective baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence detective baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus detective baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so detective baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that detective baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that detective baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that detective baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, since if detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, because if detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement, as if detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective baker found a secret ledger in the jewelry store's basement then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Baker did not find a secret ledger in the jewelry 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street and the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the alarm company technician did not report suspicious activity before the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The alarm company technician did not report suspicious activity before 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 alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the alarm company technician did not report suspicious activity before the robbery.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the alarm company technician reported suspicious activity before the robbery then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The alarm company technician did not report suspicious activity before the robbery
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.