| Revision as of 07:35, 22 July 2002 editWesley (talk | contribs)7,326 editsm +semicolon← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:48, 23 September 2002 edit undoOlivier (talk | contribs)Administrators98,448 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| * one can only be excused from flying bombing missions on the grounds of insanity; | * one can only be excused from flying bombing missions on the grounds of insanity; | ||
| * one must ask to be considered. | * one must ask to be considered. | ||
| However, should someone ask, it must be because he is in fear for his life This is proof of sanity, and therefore he is obliged to continue flying missions. | However, should someone ask, it must be because he is in fear for his life. This is proof of sanity, and therefore he is obliged to continue flying missions. | ||
| If someone is truly insane, he doesn't ask, and therefore continues flying missions, even though technically he doesn't have to. | If someone is truly insane, he doesn't ask, and therefore continues flying missions, even though technically he doesn't have to. | ||
Revision as of 10:48, 23 September 2002
Catch-22 is a novel by Joseph Heller about the madness of war. Specifically, it follows a number of American soldiers during World War II.
Within the book, catch-22 is the circular logic that prevents anyone from being invalided out of the military:
- one can only be excused from flying bombing missions on the grounds of insanity;
- one must ask to be considered.
However, should someone ask, it must be because he is in fear for his life. This is proof of sanity, and therefore he is obliged to continue flying missions.
If someone is truly insane, he doesn't ask, and therefore continues flying missions, even though technically he doesn't have to.
The phrase has become common to refer to any similar self-referential policy.