It is, that's a valid argument.
这是个有效论点。
So that's a valid argument. Accept it?
这是个有效论点，对吗？
That is not a valid argument or excuse.
那是一个不能令人信服的理由或托词。
You, you give me the definition of a valid argument.
你们给我一个有效论点的定义。
Okay does everyone see why this is a valid argument?
大家都明白为什么这是有效论点了吧？
How can we get a valid argument form from talk of morality?
我们怎样从道德的谈论中得到一个有效的论点形式呢？
So what do we know? This is a valid argument isn't it? Yes?
我们知道什么呢？这是个有效论点，不是吗？
Q Here is a valid argument form. If P then Q. P therefore Q.
这里有一个有效的论点形式，如果P，那么Q，P所以。
Now that looks like a deductively valid argument doesn't it?
这看起来像演绎有效的论点，不是吗？
It's a valid argument but it won't ever going to persuade you.
这是有效论点，但是这不会说服你。
You could have a valid argument in which the premises are false.
前提为假,论点可能为真。
What you gave me wasn't a valid argument do you have another one?
你给我的不是一个有效的论点，你们还有吗？
It's only sound if it's a valid argument and it has true premises.
如果是有效论点才会完好，他有真前提。
So you could have a valid argument in which the premises are all false.
一个有效论点可能,前提都为假。
The only valid argument I can see for the iPhone not being the best is the AT&T requirement.
就我所知，iPhone唯一不能称为最好的有效论据，是AT&T的条件。
Once you have got an valid argument you can add anything you like and it will still be valid.
一旦你有一个有效论点，你可以加任何东西，他依然有效。
So if we see the conclusion of a valid argument is false what do you know? A little bit longer.
如果我们看到有效论点的结论为假，你们知道什么？有一点长。
Actually a valid argument doesn't have true premises and true conclusion what is a valid argument?
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？
This is a deductively valid argument and its truth preserving and therefore it is very, very useful.
这是个演绎的有效论点，保留了真理，所以非常有用。
Inductive grounds as well. Here this is observation isn't it and do we have a valid argument here?
也是归纳的基础，这里是观察，不是吗？，我们有一个有效地论点？
So it's a valid argument but has false premises. Okay what about if it is an invalid argument with false premises.
这是个有效的论点但是有假前提，如果是无效论点有假前提呢？
Do you see how that is-if that's a deductively valid argument it in the virtue of the meaning of the word wrong. Isn't it?
你们明白，如果那是一个演绎有效的论点，它是通过错误这个词的意思，不是吗？
And that's what tells you whether the argument is valid or not So this is a deductively valid argument and this is a fallacy.
这是他告诉你结论是否有效，这是演绎有效的论点，这是一个谬论。
And I am saying actually the discovery that the valid argument is that the conclusion in which is false can be hugely important.
我说实际上发现那是有效论点，结论为假，可能很重要。
But if we put this together for a valid argument we get that is known to be false, so we know either one of these got to be false.
但是如果我们一起放出这个，作为有效论点，我们知道的就为假，所以我们知道两者中的一个为假。
If we can show the conclusion of a valid argument - put your hand up-if we can show the conclusion of a valid argument is false what do we know?
如果我们可以展示有效论点的结论-，举手，如果我们可以展示，有效论点的结论为假，我们知道什么？
That's right. So if you have a valid argument a deductively valid argument in which the conclusion is false then you know one of the premises must be false.
对，所以如果论点有效，一个演绎的有效论点中结论是假的，你就知道前提中有一项是假的。
So again we have a deductively valid argument but it's not deductively valid in actually we're a lot further on in modal logical then we are in deontic logic.
所以我们有一个演绎的有效论点,但是这不是演绎有效的,实际上我们模态逻辑有很多要讲的,然后我们再讲道义逻辑。
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.
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。
When executing the script containing getopt, named opttest, using a valid argument of -x-or --xxxxx, getopt recognizes the switch and executes the code within the case switch
在执行包含getopt（称为opttest）的脚本时，如果在 -x 或 --xxxxx 中使用有效的参数，getopt 会识别出开关并执行 case 开关中的代码
应用推荐