Case study tests dependency in Buddhist philosophy, demonstrating implications for computer-assisted proofs in mathematics.
This paper explores the legitimacy of computer-assisted proofs as a methodological framework in philosophy, using the Four Color Theorem as a historical precedent. Following Appel and Haken’s 1976 proof and its later Coq formalization by Gonthier, it argues that formally verified reasoning—once controversial in mathematics—can equally transform philosophical analysis. As a case study, a Coq formalization tests interpretations of Pratītyasamutpāda (dependent origination) against classical identity axioms, showing a logical collapse when dependency erases distinction. The result is not an exegetical claim about Buddhism, but a proof-of-concept for “formal metaphysics”: applying machine-verifiable logic to clarify metaphysical commitments. The study situates philosophy within the same epistemic evolution mathematics underwent when computer proofs gained acceptance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Siegfried Meister (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: