خلاصة:
The discussion of significations and their classifications has no precedent in Aristotelian logic or Stoic-Megarian logic and is considered one of the logical innovations of Ibn Sina. In general, he can be regarded more as the founder and originator of the subject of significations—rather than its explainer and expander. Among the three types of verbal significations, implicative significance (dalalat al-iltizami) has been the most controversial. In the expressions of Ibn Sina, and especially in the works of his commentators and followers, many disputes and doubts have been raised regarding its nature, the conditions for its realization, or even its validity. Among the most important of these doubts are the suspicion of the lack of independence of implicative significance and its composition of two identity significations, the suspicion that implication is excluded from the types of verbal significance, and the suspicion of the obsolescence of implication and the prohibition of its use in sciences due to the infinity of its implications. This research, emphasizing the independence and also the verbal nature of implication, introduces it as one of the most important significations used in the sciences; and considers the necessary element in this significance to be 'mental necessity' and of the type 'absolute betweenness necessity'.
ملخص الجهاز:
This research, by emphasizing the independence and also the verbal nature of implication, introduces it as one of the most important significations used in the sciences; and it considers the valid necessity in this signification to be "mental necessity" and of the type "absolute betweenness necessity.
The next issue concerns the type of relationship between the "موضوع له" and the "signified", which, based on the relationships of equality, general and absolute specific, or distinction between the two mentioned concepts, leads us to identical, inclusive, or implicative significations [Diagram 2].
Regarding the distinction between the three types of significations, we read in the commentary on Isharat that: "Identical signification is purely conventional, whereas the two significations of inclusion and implication are not obtained through sharing in the meaning and its part, such as 'possible' for the general and specific, or through the meaning and its necessary requirement, such as 'sun' for the light of the sun and its certainty, but rather they are obtained due to intellectual transition from one to the other" (Tusi, 5731, Vol. 1, pp.
Based on this, Ghazali uses the method of deductive syllogism, showing that the consequence (tali) proves the invalidity of the implication: "If implicational signification is valid, it follows that a single word would have infinite signifieds, and this consequence is false" (Qutb Razi, n.
Logicians have stipulated for the realization of implicational signification that there must be a mental necessity between the meaning of the subject and the signified of the word, or its external necessary meaning.
(
, 
, 
)
