The given argument is structured as follows:

1. Premise 1: If it is hot, then the streets are dry. (If $p$, then $q$)
2. Premise 2: It is hot. ($p$)
3. Conclusion: Therefore, the streets are dry. ($q$)

This is a classic case of modus ponens, a valid form of argument in propositional logic. Modus ponens states:

• If $p \rightarrow q$ (if $p$, then $q$)
• And $p$ (it is hot)
• Then $q$ (the streets are dry).

To determine the validity using a truth table:

Let:

• $p$ = "It is hot."
• $q$ = "The streets are dry."

We need to evaluate the truth values for all combinations of $p$ and $q$ and examine whether the conclusion follows logically.

In this case, the argument states that $p$ is true, so we look at the rows where $p = T$. When $p = T$, the only way the implication $p \rightarrow q$ holds true is if $q$ is also true.

Thus, based on the truth table, the argument is valid because whenever the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true.

Would you like further details or have any questions? Here are some related questions to consider:

1. What is the general form of modus ponens?
2. How would the truth table look if we used modus tollens?
3. How does one differentiate between valid and invalid arguments?
4. What is the truth table for a biconditional statement?
5. Can you explain how logical fallacies differ from valid argument forms?

Tip: Truth tables are a powerful way to verify logical validity. Always consider every possible truth value to ensure completeness.