In truth lies beauty, and in beauty truth: the Te Henga Section of the Nurses' Marxist Union invited a guest philosopher to help them ponder the rights and wrongs of the photographic essay.

You can call the Te Henga Section of the Nurses' Marxist Union a lot of things--many people have. But, by golly, you can't call us selfish. Nor non-topical let me explain. We were going to provide a searing analysis of why present day nursing education is such a paragon of excellence and unassailable virtue for this month's Kai Tiaki Nursing New Zealand. But wait, there's more. The column following that was going to explore why the hospital-based system was so wretchedly vile. We did the work, we wrote the columns. But--here's where we are unselfish--we caucused (we're a bit like the Green Party in that respect) and agreed we'd focus on The Photos, and that's why you can't call us non-topical

Now, the Te Henga Section of the Nurses' Marxist Union have meetings that are a little, shall we say, unstructured. For that reason, we brought in an expert. Pol-Roger is an expert "Cod Philosopher':

Cod Philosophy is the new big thing in thinking circles. It's based on the work of Roger-Pot Droit and aims to do to conventional philosophy what punk rock did to stadium rock in the late 70s--that is, give it a good kick up what you sit on.

The 'Socratic Method'

Pol-Roger came to our little meeting and said he was going to use the "Socratic Method" with us. Educators know what the Socratic Method is. It is what you use when you've been out with your mates the night before, haven't prepared a lecture and are too hungover to care. So, hey presto! You ask your class to ask you questions. So--"Socratic Method"!

Anyway, here's the exchange. For simplicity, we've used the "Q-A" format.

Q: Was Kai Tiaki Nursing New Zealand right to publish photos of old people, a few without clothes?

P-R: Well, "right" is too rigid a signifier, chers comrades. Ask me more precise questions, please. It's not good enough to say something's "good", "bad", "beautiful", "shameful", "disgusting" etc. You nurses should know better than that. Aren't you supposed to bring critical reflection to your work?

(Note: Just because a philosopher says he's accessible, simple and understandable, it doesn't mean that he is, nor that he isn't the usual run-of-the-the-Mill pedant.)

Q: OK, how do we know if Kai Tiaki Nursing New Zealand was right or not to publish these photos?

P-R: Aah, that's better. Well, we can took at this from a utilitarian view. The question is: Do these photos cause the world to be a better place? Do they help people to be happier, live better lives and increase the general sum of goodness in the world?

Q: How would you measure that?

P-R: Exactly! That is the big question. By whom and how is that measured? But let us look at this. We can take several perspectives. Will the caregivers get more money because of these photos? If so, that is good, n'est ce pas? If one or two families are aggrieved by this, that is bad, eh? But, on what basis do they feel aggrieved? That is an important point. Do these photos help nurses who may feet discomforted by public nudity in this magazine? Do these photos help the old people, the subjects? Aah, rues cheris, it is, as we say in the philosophy business, un prickly pear.

Q: Surely we shouldn't be showing naked people in a nursing magazine?

P-R: Mais oui, if you take a deontological approach. That is, if you say "something is wrong" on principle. Deontologists are happy people. They say something is right or wrong and they don't ever have to think again, they can pack their brain in a box and forget about it.

Q: But who determines if something is right or wrong?

P-R: Exactly. So, mes amis, ask yourself why is showing photos of naked old people in a nursing magazine right or wrong? Renember it is not Helmut Newton who is taking these pictures for Vanity Fair.

Q: Don't you think that anybody who was offended by these photos for any reason has a legitimate complaint?

P-R: Hmmm ... well. Let us consider what sensibilities are offended. I would ask you, rues petit camemberts, of those who write letters of complaint about this, how many letters of outrage have they penned to protest the low pay of caregivers, the measly and mingey organisations that care for our elderly, the economic conditions that force families to hand over the care of their elderly to strangers and so on. Or to commend and support those who work with--how do you call it?--aroha, to give of themselves to care for the old ones? I would ask you, mes petites pois, where does the real obscenity lie?

Q: What about aesthetics? Are the photos any good?

P-R: Good question. The problem of aesthetic theory is one that has occupied all of us philosophers from time immemorial. For example, do we took for beauty in photos as objects, or in the subjects of the photos? I think the view of the elderly--with bodies that we will inhabit, if we get that old--is disturbing, mes chers cheveaux. At least, I get disturbed. But, my vieux chums, at the end of it all I believe this: In truth lies beauty, and in beauty truth. Don't you think?

Chris Cottingham, RN, BA, MEd, DipSocSci, is a staff nurse at Moko Services, Maori Mental Health, Waitemata District Health Board. In his spare time, he writes a bi-monthly column of alternative (sometimes amusing or irreverent but always challenging) musings on our profession.