 While condition (9)(i) repeats the simpler definition in (8), condition (9)(ii) expresses the idea that if \(A\) is, for instance, an intentional state and goes into the antecedent of many laws, then even if \(R_i\) does not have completers in the cp-law in question, cp\((A\rightarrow B)\) is still true, if \(R_i\) does have completers in many other cp-laws.