As we all know, the converse proposition of $P\rightarrow Q$ is $Q\rightarrow P$. But when it comes to predicate logic, things may become different. Consider this: $$(\forall x) (P(x)\rightarrow Q(x)).\tag{1}$$ Should its converse be $(\forall x) (Q(x)\rightarrow P(x))$?
I don't think so. In my opinion, we shouldn't neglect the quantifier $\forall$, which constrains $(Q(x)\rightarrow P(x))$.
Consider another proposition: $$(\exists x) (P(x)\rightarrow Q(x))\tag{2}.$$ When we deduce its converse, we can rewrite it as $$(\forall x) P(x)\rightarrow (\exists x)Q(x) \tag{3}.$$ At this moment, we can readily obtain its converse: $(\exists x)Q(x)\rightarrow (\forall x) P(x)$.
Let's return to proposition (1) now. Unfortunately, I cannot rewrite it in the form of proposition (3). So I can't get its converse.
Did I make a mistake in the deduction above? And what's the converse of proposition (1)? Thanks a lot!