A small technology puzzle

"If we can keep up with the technology...we will always find room in worldwide markets..." says Nokia previous CEO Kari H. Kairamo(1932-1988)
  

Is the following logically correct? (For A -> B, thus ~B -> ~A)

"If we can't find room in worldwide markets, we can't keep up with the technology."

Can anyone figure out how to weaken the statement?

Thanks Thanks

Not exactly sure what the question is about.

But, the "~B -> ~A" should be something like:

"If we cannot find room in worldwide markets, then we have not been able to keep up with the technology."

Thank you for "robertchu" your reply.

Actually, i couldn't understand Necessary and Sufficient Conditions, even i study GMAT for some days.

So, i went to get a book of LSAT official. It talks about these two conditions.

Now i have better idea about what the differences.

For the statement "If we can keep up with the technology, we will always find room in worldwide markets."

First, we have to identify whether "we can keep up with technology" is a sufficient or necessary condition for "we will always find room in worldwide markets"

The statement tell us that "we can keep up with technology" is a sufficient condition for "we will always find room in worldwide markets".

But notice that the statement does not say that "we can keep up with technology" is the only thing that makes "we will always find room in worldwide markets", since there may be other possibility that makes the same result.

"If we can keep up with the technology (A), we will always find room in worldwide markets (B)."

The statement can be written as (if A --> B)

Therefore, we can infer from the statement for 2 cases:

(1) if "we can keep up with technology", then we can infer that the "we will always find room in worldwide markets" occurs (A --> B)

(2) if we know that we couldn't find room in worldwide markets, we can infer that the condition we can't keep up with technology (~B --> ~A)

Thus, you're right!

"If we cannot find room in worldwide markets, then we have not been able to keep up with the technology."

is what we can infer from the statement as the 2nd case.

However, we can't infer from the statement for two cases:

(1) if we can't keep up with technology, it doesn' t mean that we couldn't find room in worldwide markets (~A --> ~B)

(2) if we find room in worldwide markets, it doesn't necessarily mean that we can keep up with technology (B --> A)