<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 emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder, since if emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder, because if emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder, as if emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If emily's car was seen leaving the crime scene shortly after the murder then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Emily's car was not seen leaving the crime scene shortly after 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 hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, since if detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, because if detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The arson occurred on elm street, as if detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, since if detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, because if detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Detective hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard, as if detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If detective hayes discovered a stash of stolen jewelry buried in emily's backyard then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Detective Hayes did not discover a stash of stolen jewelry buried in Emily's backyard
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street and richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore richard anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence richard anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus richard anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine 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 fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so richard anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that richard anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that richard anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that richard anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine, since if richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine, because if richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine, as if richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If richard anderson's fingerprints were found on the murder weapon's magazine then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Richard Anderson's fingerprints were not found on the murder weapon's magazine
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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street and sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, since if sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, because if sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 therapist, dr. anderson, did not have session notes indicating sarah's fear of emily, as if sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If sarah's therapist, dr. anderson, had sessions notes indicating sarah's fear of emily then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Sarah's therapist, Dr. Anderson, did not have session notes indicating Sarah's fear of Emily
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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street and a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore a gps device linked to the stolen van was not found in emily's possession.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A GPS device linked to the stolen van was not found in Emily's possession
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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence a gps device linked to the stolen van was not found in emily's possession.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A GPS device linked to the stolen van was not found in Emily's possession
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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus a gps device linked to the stolen van was not found in emily's possession.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A GPS device linked to the stolen van was not found in Emily's possession
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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that a gps device linked to the stolen van was not found in emily's possession.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A GPS device linked to the stolen van was not found in Emily's possession
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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so a gps device linked to the stolen van was not found in emily's possession.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A GPS device linked to the stolen van was not found in Emily's possession
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 gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that a gps device linked to the stolen van was not found in emily's possession.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a gps device linked to the stolen van was found in emily's possession then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: A GPS device linked to the stolen van was not found in Emily's possession
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.