Mathematical proof compels assent through guided decision rather than world-fact or command.

Evidence

Patterson, following Wittgenstein, likely believes we are compelled to accept a mathematical proof, for example, not because it tells us what must be the case in the world, or because it commands our assent, but because we are induced to make a decision that is guided by the proof. — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 341

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Wittgenstein’s rule-following and the ‘bedrock’ discussion in On Certainty and Philosophical Investigations. — connects to: Mathematical certainty led philosophers to suppose thought is superior to sense — Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy, 203; Mathematical facts are true independently of human thought — G. H. Hardy, A Mathematician’s Apology, 264; Formalism is treating as inexorable any choice that is not. — Frederick Schauer, Formalism, 34 (+1 more)
• DEFINE: Clarifies the Wittgensteinian stance that proofs guide a decision rather than command or report objective fact.

Broader Connections

• Mathematical certainty led philosophers to suppose thought is superior to sense #expands (0.50) — Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy, 203
• Mathematical facts are true independently of human thought #contradicts (0.40) — G. H. Hardy, A Mathematician’s Apology, 264
• Formalism is treating as inexorable any choice that is not. #complicates (0.40) — Frederick Schauer, Formalism, 34