Final answer:
The statement is false, as a substitution instance of affirming the consequent is not a valid argument. Valid deductive inferences can be represented using logical argument patterns.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that any argument that is a substitution instance of affirming the consequent is a valid argument is false.
A substitution instance of affirming the consequent is a logical fallacy where the truth of the consequent is affirmed to infer the truth of the antecedent.
Valid deductive inferences can be represented using logical argument patterns, such as the disjunctive syllogism.