Datasets:

cris177

/

Arguments

like 4

<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, so it can be concluded that 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, so 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, which implies that 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, which shows that 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, which establishes that 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: ```The arson occurred on elm street, since 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.``` [/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: ```The arson occurred on elm street, because 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.``` [/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: ```The arson occurred on elm street, as 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.``` [/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 the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore no security camera captured the suspect entering the building.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building 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 the arson did not occur on elm street, hence no security camera captured the suspect entering the building.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building 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 the arson did not occur on elm street, thus no security camera captured the suspect entering the building.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building 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 the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that no security camera captured the suspect entering the building.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building 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 the arson did not occur on elm street, so no security camera captured the suspect entering the building.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building 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 the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that no security camera captured the suspect entering the building.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building 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 the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that no security camera captured the suspect entering the building.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building 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 the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that no security camera captured the suspect entering the building.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```No security camera captured the suspect entering the building, since if a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur 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: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```No security camera captured the suspect entering the building, because if a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur 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: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```No security camera captured the suspect entering the building, as if a security camera captured the suspect entering the building then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur 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: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: No security camera captured the suspect entering the building 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry box was emptied, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry box was emptied, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry box was emptied, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry box was emptied, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry box was emptied, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry box was emptied, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry box was emptied, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and laura's jewelry box was emptied, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's jewelry box was emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's jewelry box was emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street and laura's jewelry box was emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Laura's jewelry box was emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore laura's jewelry box was not emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence laura's jewelry box was not emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus laura's jewelry box was not emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that laura's jewelry box was not emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so laura's jewelry box was not emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that laura's jewelry box was not emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that laura's jewelry box was not emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that laura's jewelry box was not emptied.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was not emptied, since if laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was not emptied, because if laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied 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 jewelry box was not emptied, as if laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If laura's jewelry box was emptied then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Laura's jewelry box was not emptied Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer brown discovered a hidden basement, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer brown discovered a hidden basement, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer brown discovered a hidden basement, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer brown discovered a hidden basement, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer brown discovered a hidden basement, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer brown discovered a hidden basement, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer brown discovered a hidden basement, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and officer brown discovered a hidden basement, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```The arson occurred on elm street, since if officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street and officer brown discovered a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```The arson occurred on elm street, because if officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street and officer brown discovered a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```The arson occurred on elm street, as if officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street and officer brown discovered a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: Officer brown discovered a hidden basement Conclusion: The arson occurred on Elm Street Type of argument: modus ponen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore officer brown did not discover a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence officer brown did not discover a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus officer brown did not discover a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that officer brown did not discover a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so officer brown did not discover a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that officer brown did not discover a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that officer brown did not discover a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that officer brown did not discover a hidden basement.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```Officer brown did not discover a hidden basement, since if officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```Officer brown did not discover a hidden basement, because if officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```Officer brown did not discover a hidden basement, as if officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If officer brown discovered a hidden basement then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: Officer Brown did not discover a hidden basement Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street and the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore the suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence the suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus the suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that the suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so the suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which implies that the suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which shows that the suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident 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 suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, which establishes that the suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident, since if the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident, because if the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>

<s>[INST] Analize the following argument, identifying premises, conclusion, type of argument, and argument validity: ```The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident, as if the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street and the arson did not occur on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If the suspect's alibi is he was at work during the incident then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: The suspect's alibi is not that he was at work during the incident 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument, therefore the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument, hence the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument, thus the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument, so it can be concluded that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument, so the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument, which implies that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument, which shows that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument, which establishes that the arson occurred on elm street.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street and a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: A neighbor reported hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, therefore a neighbor did not report hearing a loud argument.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: A neighbor did not report hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, hence a neighbor did not report hearing a loud argument.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: A neighbor did not report hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, thus a neighbor did not report hearing a loud argument.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: A neighbor did not report hearing a loud argument 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 neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street, and the arson did not occur on elm street, so it can be concluded that a neighbor did not report hearing a loud argument.``` [/INST] Premise 1: If a neighbor reported hearing a loud argument then the arson occurred on elm street Premise 2: The arson did not occur on elm street Conclusion: A neighbor did not report hearing a loud argument Type of argument: modus tollen Validity: True </s>