Assumption or entailment? A false dilemma Interpreting Mirdamad’s thesis from a logical point of view

There is a controversy in Islamic philosophy over the relationship between something’s being something and something’s being. Two theses are well-known: assumption and entailment. Notoriously, Mirdamad is considered to be among the adherents of the entailment thesis. It is argued here that Mirdamad’s thesis is neither assumption nor entailment. Actually, his thesis includes a collection of different propositions that combine assumption and entailment variously. I interpret his thesis on the basis of his theory of subsistence and existence. Furthermore, I distinguish between semantical and metaphysical aspects of Mirdamad’s thesis. I abstract some logical consequences from these semantical aspects. I explain then why these logical consequences do not follow from a bunch of the alternative theses at issue.