A word for "an unsolvable problem"/"lose-lose situation"?

[ianzin]

The education system is in even worse shape than we thought.

Not ‘Catch-22 situation’. That means what Nametag said. More generally, a situation involving contradictory conditions attached to a desired aim, such that any attempt to achieve that aim is bound to fail.

Not ‘zugzwang’. This chess term refers to when Player A attempts to put Player B in difficulties, but B’s response puts A in even greater difficulties.

Not ‘conundrum’ (a puzzle or riddle) or ‘paradox’ (an apparent contradiction, either intriguing or puzzling in nature, which seems difficult to resolve).

Not ‘Hobson’s Choice’. This means a choice which is no choice at all, e.g. ‘You can have it in any colour you want so long as it’s black’.

Not ‘Gordian Knot’. This refers to an extremely difficult and seemingly intractable problem, of a kind that would take a long time to solve if it could be solved at all. There is also ‘to cut the Gordian Knot’, which refers to a brash action which renders the solving of the problem somewhat redundant (like simply cutting a rope with a sharp knife as opposed to bothering to untie the complicated knot).

Not ‘zero sum game’. This is a term from formal game playing theory. It refers to any game, or game strategy, which must necessarily produce a result where the scores for either side would produce zero if added together (e.g. team A can only get 5 points if team B end up with -5).

To be ‘on the horns of a dilemma’ is a good choice when used correctly, since it does mean to have to choose between two equally undesirable alternatives. However, many people these days simply use the phrase, or the word ‘dilemma’, to mean ‘a difficult choice’ or even just ‘a choice or decision’.

‘No-win scenario’ is good, and applicable, but smacks of military jargon.

To have to choose between ‘Scylla and Charybdis’ is also good for those with a classical taste. It’s from Homer’s Odyssey, and means to have to choose between two equally unwanted alternatives.

You’re welcome, don’t mention it.

[panamajack]

*Originally posted by ianzin *

Not ‘zugzwang’. This chess term refers to when Player A attempts to put Player B in difficulties, but B’s response puts A in even greater difficulties.
…
You’re welcome, don’t mention it.

Sorry, just had to … ‘zugzwang’ (lit. ‘forced move’) refers to a position in which one would rather not move, as any move puts them in a losing position (it comes up, when it does, usually in endgames). I’m not sure if there’s a term for what you’ve described, maybe ‘being Bobby Fischer’.

And Polycarp was first to reject Catch-22, and defined it correctly.

Since I need to make my own mistake, I’ll relate that I’ve heard that Hobson was intending to provide a more egalitarian stable – you couldn’t bribe him to get a better horse, so the rich and the poor got the same chances.

[Colibri]

*Originally posted by ianzin *
**Not ‘zugzwang’. This chess term refers to when Player A attempts to put Player B in difficulties, but B’s response puts A in even greater difficulties. **

This is incorrect.

From wordreference.com:

zugzwang - Chess.
n. 1. a position in which one player can move only with loss or severe disadvantage.
vb. 2. (tr.) to manoeuvre (one’s opponent) into a zugzwang. [from German, from Zug a pull, tug + Zwang force, compulsion]

From Infoplease.com

zug-zwang —n. Chess.
a situation in which a player is limited to moves that cost pieces or have a damaging positional effect.

From chess.about.com

Zugzwang
Definition: A German term for the obligation to move. All legal moves lead to a worsening of the position. The concept is an important weapon in the endgame, and occasionally arises in the middle game.

It seems to me that zugzwang is an excellent choice to describe a lose-lose situation.

[Colibri]

PS. For guys, zugzwang succinctly describes one’s position immediately after one’s wife/SO has asked the question, “Do these jeans make my ass look fat?”

[X_Slayer_ALE]

I always thought that if you get into a losing situation you were screwed and if you get into a situation where you had to pick from 2 losing propositions, you were double screwed

dilemma doesnt have the emotive effect but I guess it is the most proper and accurate term.

See its not the same when you say,

“We had a dilemma in the 2000 presidential elections.”

However,

“We were double screwed at the 2000 presidential elections.”

Brings a certain *je ne sais pas *

[Finagle]

This is an interesting question, mostly because you’d think there’d be a word. There are a lot of words that are pretty close but that are dependent on context.

Deadlock, for example, implies that you’re already committed to the action but can no longer advance because someone or something else is similarly committed in opposition to you.

A “Mexican stand-off” has much the same connotation as deadlock.

A Sisyphean task implies a task that never ends, but doesn’t have the subtext of another even more unpleasant result if you don’t try.

“Damned if you do, damned if you don’t” is too verbose.
A “Pyrrhic victory” implies that you’ve already found out the hard way that the apparently better solution wasn’t much better than the worse solution.

“Intractable” works, but only for mathematicians.

[ianzin]

Re zugzwang, thanks for the correction, panamajack and Colibri. Apologies all around for offering duff information. Just goes to prove that this is a wonderful place for learning.

[moriah]

Part of the problem of defining the terms is that “an unsolvable problem” and “lose-lose situation” are two different concepts, and thus, would need two different synonyms.

Peace.

The predicament is unfathomable.

[bbeaty]

Yay for “double bind.” I recall that it describes THREE choices: the first one you lose, the second one you can’t win, and third; it’s even worse if you try to leave or avoid making a decision.