Logic statements (was RE: What is understanding?)

[Cary Busby <mail@ARBORSCI.COM>]

I prefer to look at logic statements with a concrete example.  Let's return
to Feynman's quote:

"What I cannot create, I do not understand."

The complication with this particular statement of logic is that it begins
with negatives.  I will try to fit it into the pattern suggested by K.

Conditional (Rephrased): If I cannot create it, I do not understand it.
Converse:  If I do not understand it, I cannot create it.
Inverse:  If I do understand it, I can create it.
Contrapositive:  If I can create it, I do understand it.

Am I doing it right?  My original question was an attempt to generate
discussion on the Contrapositive statement above.  If I can create it, do I
understand it?  Can it at least be said that I may understand it BETTER if I
can create it?

Cary

> *******************************************************************
> Just for clarification, If I recall correctly:
>
> Conditional:  If  A then B
> Converse:  If B then A
> Inverse:  IF  NOT A then NOT B
> Contrapositive:  IF NOT B then NOT A
>
> If the conditional and converse are both true then  a biconditional.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------
> ------------
> If I am all wet on any of this,  please point out my errors.
>  Many moons
> have passed since I took predicate and formal logic.
>
> Best Regards,
> K.