the stapler is conspicuous.
sent1: that something is conspicuous is correct if it is a heather. sent2: if something is not a dollar but it consumes the fact that it is a kind of a heather is not wrong. sent3: the stapler is not conspicuous if the stop is conspicuous. sent4: if the stapler does not lurch whiffletree then the fact that it is not a dollar and does consume is not false. sent5: if the stapler is not a toy the stop is not antiquarian and it does not carol chanar. sent6: that the stop is not antiquarian and it does not carol chanar does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stapler is not a toy.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the stop is a kind of non-antiquarian thing that does not carol chanar.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the stapler is a kind of a toy.; sent2 -> int4: if the stapler is not a dollar and consumes it is a heather.; sent1 -> int5: if the stapler is a heather then it is conspicuous.;
that the stapler is not conspicuous is correct.
$hypothesis$ = the stapler is conspicuous. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is conspicuous is correct if it is a heather. sent2: if something is not a dollar but it consumes the fact that it is a kind of a heather is not wrong. sent3: the stapler is not conspicuous if the stop is conspicuous. sent4: if the stapler does not lurch whiffletree then the fact that it is not a dollar and does consume is not false. sent5: if the stapler is not a toy the stop is not antiquarian and it does not carol chanar. sent6: that the stop is not antiquarian and it does not carol chanar does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the stapler is not a toy.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the stop is a kind of non-antiquarian thing that does not carol chanar.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the stapler is a kind of a toy.; sent2 -> int4: if the stapler is not a dollar and consumes it is a heather.; sent1 -> int5: if the stapler is a heather then it is conspicuous.; __UNKNOWN__