Re: Logic statements (was RE: What is understanding?)

[Tim Burgess <tburgess@JAGUAR1.USOUTHAL.EDU>]

> Conditional (Rephrased): If I cannot create it, I do not understand it.

The testable
IF it cannot be created then it is not understood.

> Contrapositive:  If I can create it, I do understand it.

Not a test as proposed by Feynman.
To "create" would be a necessary but not sufficient to know there
is "understanding".

Tim


> 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.