A Catch-22, coined by Joseph Heller in his novel Catch-22, is a paradox in rules, regulations, procedures, or situations in which one has knowledge of being or becoming a victim but has no control over it occurring.
Logic
The archetypal Catch-22, as formulated by Heller, involves the case of John Yossarian, a U.S. Army Air Forces bombardier, who wishes to be grounded from combat flight duty. To be grounded, he must be officially evaluated by the squadron's flight surgeon and then found "unfit to fly."
"Unfit" would be any pilot that is actually willing to fly such dangerous missions: as one would have to be mad to want to take on such missions.
But the "problem" is that to be declared "unfit", he must first "ask for evaluation", which is considered as a sufficient proof for being declared "sane". These conditions make being declared "unfit" impossible.
The "Catch 22" is that "anyone who wants to get out of combat duty, isn't really crazy" [1] Hence, pilots who request a fitness evaluation are sane, and therefore must fly in combat. At the same time, if an evaluation is not requested by the pilot, he will never receive one (i.e. they can never be found "insane"), meaning he must also fly in combat.
Therefore, Catch-22 ensures that no pilot can ever be grounded for being insane - even if they were.
A logical formulation of this situation is:
- 1.
(Premise: If a person is excused from flying (E), that must be because they are both insane (I), and request an evaluation (R));
- 2.
(Premise: If a person is insane (I), they should not realize that they are, and would have no reason to request an evaluation)
- 3.
(2, Definition of implication: since an insane person would not request an evaluation, it follows that all people must either not be insane, or not request an evaluation)
- 4.
(3, De Morgan: since all people must either not be insane, or not request an evaluation, it follows that no person is both insane and request an evaluation)
- 5.
(4, 1, Modus Tollens: since a person may be excused from flying only if they are both insane and request an evaluation, but no person can be both insane and request an evaluation, it follows that no person can be excused from flying)
Other uses from the novel
The novel contains several examples of the Catch-22 regulation and other similar situations. One example occurs when Luciana is distraught because no man will marry her because she is not a virgin. Yossarian offers to marry her, but she claims he is crazy for wanting to marry a non-virgin like herself and says she can't marry a crazy man.
Major Major creates a Catch-22 when he instructs his sergeant that no one may come in and see him, unless he is not in. If he is in, people must be told to wait — until he has left via the window.
Besides being an unsolvable logical dilemma, Heller's text contains two more distinct clauses of Catch-22. In the first chapter, officers who censor the privates' letters must sign their own name according to Catch-22, and in the final chapters it is restated simply as “anything can be done to you that you can not prevent”. The latter clause, in some instances, provides a solution to Catch-22 which is captured by the old German expression, die Flucht nach vorne antreten (“to take flight [flee] forward”): In the case of Orr, a friend of Yossarian (Heller’s main character), the solution was to desert and flee to Sweden, a solution that Yossarian ultimately adopts himself.
Other forms of Catch-22 are invoked throughout the novel to justify various bureaucratic actions. At one point, victims of harassment by military police (MPs) quote the MPs as having explained one of Catch-22's provisions: Catch-22 states that agents enforcing Catch-22 need not prove that Catch-22 actually contains whatever provision the accused violator is accused of violating. An old woman explains: Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can’t stop them from doing.
Yossarian comes to realize that Catch-22 does not actually exist, but because the powers that be claim it does, and the world believes it does, it nevertheless has potent effects. Indeed, because it does not exist there is no way it can be repealed, undone, overthrown, or denounced. The combination of brute force with specious legalistic justification is one of the book's primary motifs.
Significance of the number 22
According to many sources[2] Heller originally wanted to call the phrase, and thence the book, by other numbers, but he and his publishers eventually settled on 22. The number has no particular significance; it was chosen more or less for euphony.
See also
False dilemmas and circular logic
Situations which have logical similarities to a Catch-22.
Non-false dilemma situations
Situations which may be confused with a Catch-22, but have quite different logic or outcomes.
- Chicken or the egg — a seemingly unbreakable cycle of causation, which has an unknown origin.
- Cornelian dilemma — a choice between actions which will all have a detrimental effect on the chooser or on someone they care for.
- Deadlock — in computing, when two processes reach a standstill or impasse, each waiting for the other to finish.
- Double bind — a forced choice between two logically conflicting demands.
- Hobson’s choice — the choice between taking an option or not taking it.
- Lesser of two evils principle — a choice between two undesirable outcomes.
- Morton’s Fork — a choice between two equally unpleasant alternatives.
- Paradox — a statement or group of statements that leads to a contradiction or a situation which defies intuition.
References
- ^ Joseph Heller (1999). Catch-22: A Novel. Simon and Schuster. p. 52. ISBN 9780684865133.
- ^ [Joseph_Heller#Catch-22]
