If S# logically entails (14), then by logical equivalence ('If C, then if A then B' is equivalent to 'If C & A, then B'), a further statement can be inferred that is both necessary and a priori.
Two statements are logically equivalent when they always have the same truth value—if one is true, the other must be true, and if one is false, the other must be false.
Necessary(ontological distinction in Mulla Sadra's metaphysics)
The principle, God; pure existence without essence, quality or property that undergoes change or motion
S#(Described as an expansion of S if physicalism is true.)
A proposition that, under physicalism, is entailed by and therefore implicitly included in S.
a priori(Frege treats 'analytic' as entailing 'a priori' for arithmetic.)
Knowable independently of empirical experience; here treated as a consequence of analyticity.
logically entails(used to describe the relationship between S# and statement (14))
If one statement logically entails another, it means the second statement must be true whenever the first one is true—there's no way around it.
The appeal to the necessary a posteriori is on the surface an attractive one, but it is also controversial. One problem arises from the fact that Kripke’s idea that there are necessary and a posteriori truths can be interpreted in two rather different ways. On the first interpretation — I will call it the derivation view — while there are necessary a posteriori truths, these truths can be derived a priori from truths which are a posteriori and contingent. On the second interpretation — I will ca