~*~ b@bY bLu3s ~*~

Thursday, August 24, 2006

an interesting scenario..

Catch-22 has become a term, inspired by Joseph Heller's novel Catch-22, describing a general situation in which an individual has to accomplish two actions which are mutually dependent on the other action being completed first. A familiar example of this circumstance occurs in the context of job searching. In moving from school to a career, one may encounter a Catch-22 where one cannot get a job without work experience, but one cannot gain experience without a job.

Catch-22 considers the case of a U.S. Army Air Force bombardier who wishes to be excused from combat flight duty. In order to be excused from such duty, he must submit an official medical diagnosis from his squadron's flight surgeon, demonstrating that he is unfit because he is insane. However, according to Army regulations, any sane person would naturally not want to fly combat missions because they are so dangerous. By requesting permission not to fly combat missions, on the grounds of insanity, the bombardier demonstrates that he is in fact sane and therefore is fit to fly. Conversely, any flyer who wished to fly on combat runs implicitly demonstrated that he was insane and was unfit to fly and ought to be excused, and to be excused this person would only need to submit a request. Naturally, such flyers never submitted such requests. Of course, if they did, the "catch" would assert itself, short-circuiting any such attempt to escape from combat duty.

An alternative approach to the catch follows: sanity as a prerequisite to discovering one is insane. If one submits a request to stop flying because one is insane, it shows enough sanity to recognize one is insane. In other words, one has to be sane to recognize one's own insanity.
In other words, if one does ask to be excused, this is a sign of sanity, and therefore one cannot be excused. If one does not ask to be excused, one must be insane, but one cannot be excused without asking--in which case, of course, permission would be refused.

The Catch-22 problem can never be solved and one is always limited by these circumstances and these requirements.

However, in Heller's text, a meaning for Catch 22 beyond the realm of unsolvable logical bind exists. Although the rule is stated and restated in multiple ways, usually in the "damned if you do and damned if you don’t" form, in the final chapters it is restated simply as "anything can be done to you that you can not prevent," the logical conclusion being eventual destruction or assimilation ...unless one breaks out of the system entirely. The solution for Heller is, to borrow an old Prussian expression, die flucht nach vorne antreten - "to take flight (flee) forward" - decisively freeing oneself from a situation in which it is not possible to withdraw: deserting and fleeing to Sweden in the case of Heller’s hero Yossarian or, as another example, Javert’s release of Valjean in Les Miserables even though it costs Javert his own sense of identity resulting in his suicide.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)

.. shld i die flucht nach vorne antreten?

growing up @t
3:32 PM 0 Comment(s)