<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Officer smith found a broken window at the crime scene
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s>
stringlengths 355
1.02k
|
|---|
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that no witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so no witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that no witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene, since if a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene, because if a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene, as if a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No witness saw a masked man fleeing the scene
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody footprint was found in the living room, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody footprint was found in the living room, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody footprint was found in the living room, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody footprint was found in the living room, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody footprint was found in the living room, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody footprint was found in the living room, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody footprint was found in the living room, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and a bloody footprint was found in the living room, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street and a bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street and a bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street and a bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A bloody footprint was found in the living room
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that no bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so no bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that no bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no bloody footprint was found in the living room.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room, since if a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room, because if a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
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 footprint was found in the living room, as if a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a bloody footprint was found in the living room then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: No bloody footprint was found in the living room
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street and laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis, since if laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis, because if laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura martinez did not have a restraining order against john davis, as if laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura martinez had a restraining order against john davis then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura Martinez did not have a restraining order against John Davis
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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the murder weapon was a baseball bat, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the murder weapon was a baseball bat, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the murder weapon was a baseball bat, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the murder weapon was a baseball bat, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the murder weapon was a baseball bat, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the murder weapon was a baseball bat, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the murder weapon was a baseball bat, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the murder weapon was a baseball bat, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street and the murder weapon was a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street and the murder weapon was a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street and the murder weapon was a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The murder weapon was a baseball bat
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the murder weapon was not a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the murder weapon was not a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus the murder weapon was not a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that the murder weapon was not a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so the murder weapon was not a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that the murder weapon was not a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that the murder weapon was not a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
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 murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that the murder weapon was not a baseball bat.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The murder weapon was not a baseball bat, since if the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The murder weapon was not a baseball bat, because if the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```The murder weapon was not a baseball bat, as if the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the murder weapon was a baseball bat then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: The murder weapon was not a baseball bat
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's phone records show calls to 911, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's phone records show calls to 911, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's phone records show calls to 911, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's phone records show calls to 911, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's phone records show calls to 911, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's phone records show calls to 911, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's phone records show calls to 911, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's phone records show calls to 911, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's phone records show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's phone records show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's phone records show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: Laura's phone records show calls to 911
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm 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 laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore laura's phone records do not show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence laura's phone records do not show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus laura's phone records do not show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that laura's phone records do not show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so laura's phone records do not show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that laura's phone records do not show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that laura's phone records do not show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that laura's phone records do not show calls to 911.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911, since if laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911, because if laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911, as if laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's phone records show calls to 911 then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street
Conclusion: Laura's phone records do not show calls to 911
Type of argument: modus tollen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the building, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the building
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the building, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the building
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |
<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity:
```If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street, and a security camera captured the suspect entering the building, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street
Premise 2: A security camera captured the suspect entering the building
Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street
Type of argument: modus ponen
Validity: True </s> |