首先，我们看看识别前提和结论。
So firstly let's look at identifying premises and conclusion.
结构中，有没有前提和结论？
Does something of that structure have a premise and a conclusion?
我们识别了前提和结论,下一步是什么？
We identified the premises and the conclusion what do we do next?
这个前提和结论完全，相互无关，不是吗？
This premise and the conclusion are completely irrelevant to each other. Aren't they?
技巧：将自己的前提和结论以大纲的形式列出。
Tip: Try laying your premises and conclusion out in an outline-like form.
柏拉图并没写出来，像这样罗列出前提和结论。
It's not as though Plato himself spelled it out with premises and conclusions like that.
让我们从前提和结论着手，重新构建这个论证。
Let's try to reconstruct it in terms of its premises and its conclusions.
我们怎样才能，把一个论证变得具有前提和结论呢？
How can we turn it into an argument with premises and conclusions?
专家系统领域中，知识规则是由前提和结论组成的。
In expert system fields, knowledge rules are made up of premises and conclusions.
其次，检查前提和结论，是不是用不同语言表述了同样一回事。
Next, check to see whether any of your premises basically says the same thing as the conclusion (but in different words).
由于仅仅是对话，我们不会看到一长串，有前提和结论的论证。
Of course, since the dialogue is indeed a dialogue, we don't always have the arguments laid out with a series of premises and conclusions.
所以前提和结论是一回事，都是“主动安乐死是道德上可以接受的事情。”
So the premise basically says, "active euthanasia is morally acceptable," just like the conclusion does.
反例是包含，前提和结论的否定，所以星期五Marianne穿牛仔裤。
And the counterexample set is the set consisting of the premises plus the negation of the conclusion, so it's Friday Marianne is wearing jeans.
教授：可以，形式就是，如果你记得这里有什么，什么是前提和结论。
Prof. : absolutely so the set format is, if you remember what was on there, was premise premise conclusion.
这个推理的前提和结论里都没有连接词，它们不是复合命题而是简单命题。
There are no connectives in the premises and conclusions of this reasoning. There are not complicated but simple propositions.
循环论证：把有待证实的关键性假设当作已经成立，即前提和结论实质上是一回事。
The fallacy of circular argument: It occurs when the premises presume, openly or covertly, the very conclusion that is to be demonstrated.
检查确认你已经描述了问题最重要或者最相关的方面，也就是说，前提和结论始终围绕着正在讨论的问题。
Checking that you have addressed the most important or relevant aspects of the issue (that is, that your premises and conclusion focus on what is really important to the issue), and.
技巧：将结论和前提分开考虑。
实际上一个有效论点没有真前提和真结论，什么是有效论点呢？
Actually a valid argument doesn't have true premises and true conclusion what is a valid argument?
找一些你们喜欢在酒吧里证明的，写下你们的结论和前提。
Find something which you like to argue about in the pub write down your conclusion and write down your premises.
不要喊出来，所以这个论点有效，如果我们有真前提和真结论。
Don't shout out your answer so is the argument valid if we got true premises and a true conclusion.
是排除真前提和假结论的结合，不是，或者一个或者另一个。
It's the combination of true premises and false conclusions that's ruled out. Not either one. Or one or the other.
如果有真前提和假结论，它就不可能有效，否则就可能有效。
If it's could true premises and a false conclusion it couldn't be valid. Otherwise it could be.
假前提和真结论，可能有效吗？
真前提和假结论结合的可能性，被排除了，不只是结合的实际性。
It's the possibility of combination of true premises and false conclusion that is ruled out not just the actuality of the combination.
这里真前提和假结论的结合，是被排除的。
And this is the combination of true premises and false conclusion that's ruled out.
如果有真前提和真结论呢？
好，唯一能排除论点有效性的是，是可能性，不是实际性，而是真前提，和假结论的结合。
Okay so the only thing that's ruled out in arguments being valid is the possibility, not the actuality, of the combination of the premises being true and the conclusion false.
只要你们明白,只要停止思考有效论点有,真前提和真结论，你们就明白了。
And as soon as you understand that and as soon as you stop thinking of a valid argument having true premises and true conclusion you will see what's going on here.
唯一排除论点有效性的是,真前提和假结论,结合的可能性。
The only thing that's ruled out in arguments being valid is the possibility of the combination of the premises being true and the conclusion false.
应用推荐