The phrase "accepts the validity of" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing the acknowledgment or recognition of the truth or legitimacy of a statement, argument, or concept.
Example: "The committee accepts the validity of the research findings presented by the scientists."
Alternatives: "acknowledges the legitimacy of" or "recognizes the truth of".
This is of course only valid if one accepts the validity of the genera Polygonia and Nymphalis, which some consider to be a single genus Nymphalis, along with our Aglais [e.g., [ 40, 41]].
** *** ** Q: So the answer accepts the validity of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution?
No one in the opposition areas accepts the validity of the poll, and criticism can be heard in the capital too.
Some schools may be better than others, but what really matters is that your potential or current employer accepts the validity of your degree.
In this view, knowing is characterized by the extent to which one accepts the validity of a concept.
Whoever, as Chrisippus did, accepts the validity of the principle of bivalence, opts for two-valued logic; whoever even partially rejects this principle, as Aristotle did, thereby opens the door to many-valued logic.
Students whose high school biology course included evolution (but not creationism) were significantly more likely (72% versus 58%) to accept the validity of evolutionary theory ("evolution is a scientifically valid theory"), science-based claims about the age of the earth, the mutability of species (75% versus 60%), and humans being the product of evolution (71% versus 55%).
Joseph Picchi, a D.M.V. spokesman, declined to confirm or deny that the state accepted the validity of tickets issued by Old Field or Patchogue as valid.
Yet for no reading of "if" which is stronger than the truth-functional reading is CP valid — at least this is so if we treat "&" and "~" in the classical way and accept the validity of the inference: (I) ~(A&~B); A; therefore B. Suppose CP is valid for some interpretation of "If A, B".
As previously noted by Salo et al [ 10], accepting the validity of any scoring system for quantifying joint damage requires the acceptance of the assumption that the severity of OA/joint damage can be determined histologically.
Are we psychologically prepared to accept the validity of comments which indicate our value?
