Answer
Let\[p\]be I vacation in Paris.
Let\[q\]be I eat French pastries.
Let \[r\]be I gain weight.
The form of the premises is
\[\begin{align}
& \underline{\begin{align}
& p\to q \\
& q\to r \\
\end{align}}\ \ \ \ \ \underline{\begin{array}{*{35}{l}}
\text{If I vacation in Paris, I eat French pastries}\text{.} \\
\text{If I eat French pastries, I gain weight}\text{.} \\
\end{array}} \\
& \ \therefore \ \ ?\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{Therefore, } \\
\end{align}\]
The conclusion \[p\to r\] is valid because it forms the transitive reasoning of a valid argument when it follows the given premises.
The conclusion \[p\to r\] translates as follows:
If I vacation in Paris, I gain weight.
Therefore, the valid conclusion from the provided premises is
If I vacation in Paris, I gain weight.
The valid conclusion from the provided premises is If I vacation in Paris, I gain weight.
