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？
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。
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？
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。
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。
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
Supporters of each candidate have a valid argument to make, but shouldn't they have the benefit of being able to consider postseason performance in making their determination?
每位候选人的支持者们为了各自的偶像相互之间争论不休，既然这样他们为什么不将季后赛各人的表现考虑在内呢？
So if you negate that conclusion and took away the therefore, if you negated that conclusion the set would be inconsistent wouldn't it? And that shows you that that's a valid argument.
如果你否认结论，把所以拿掉，那么，如果你否认结论，这就不一致了，不是吗？这显示这是一个有效论点。
A good deductive argument is sound if and only if it's both valid and has true premises.
一个好的演绎论点是完好的，如果且仅如果这些都有效，并且前提为真。
If an argument is valid and if the premises are true then the conclusion must be true.
如果一个论点有效，如果前提为真，那么结论肯定为真。
Would the argument be sound in this situation, where it's valid but has false premises.
论点在这种情况下能够完好吗，有效但是有假前提。
Well if they can then it can't be the case that the original argument was valid could it?
如果他们可能，那么不可能是这样，原来的论点有效，不是吗？
Okay I gave you another test. That was one test of validity and another test I gave you was in the argument is valid if and only is it's counterexample set is inconsistent.
好，给你们另一个测试，这是有效性的测试，另一个是有效论点中，如果且仅如果这是不一致的反例。
Do you think an argument could be valid if all its premises of the argument is false?
你们认为一个论点，如果前提为假，可能有效吗？
Is the argument in favor of promoting diversity a valid one?
这样的争论是不是倾向于把推行多样化变成合理的呢？
If the argument is valid it will be valid by virtual forms whatever you're talking about.
如果论点有效，那么形式就有效，不管你在谈论什么。
So as you'd expect that argument is valid but notice if I put in any other premise here it's going to stay valid. Any premise.
你希望论点有效，但是如果我把任何其他前提放在这，它还是有效，任何前提。
So circular argument is always valid and what tells you is that there got to be more to a good argument than validity.
所以循环论点都有效，告诉你们，好论点，比为真有更多要有的。
Could this argument be valid say yes - as a matter of fact this argument must be valid.
这个论点有效，说对-，实际上这个论点肯定有效。
The premises of the argument are true and the conclusion is true. Okay think of the question: do you think arguments of this sort could be valid?
论点前提为真,结论为真，想想问题：,你们认为这种论点有效吗？
An inductive argument is more or less strong whereas deductive arguments are either valid or invalid. Okay What does an argument have to have in order it to be sound?
归纳论点或多或少有力，但是演绎论点有效无效，什么能说明论点完好？
there's no possible situation where that's true and that's false therefore, that argument is valid.
没有可能这为真所以那为假,所以，论点有效。
But I don't want it to be persuasive because of a fallacy I actually want it to be a good argument as well, so I want it to be sound and valid.
但是我不想让他因为一些谬论更加有说服力，我实际上想让它成为更好的论点，所以我想让他完好有效。
The only way you can make your argument valid is if you put murder in, and that's because it begs the question.
能使你的论点有根据的唯一方法就是,你把凶手关起来，那是因为它需要问题。
The only way you can make your argument valid is if you put murder in, and that's because it begs the question.
能使你的论点有根据的唯一方法就是,你把凶手关起来，那是因为它需要问题。
应用推荐