Abstract

This paper offers a commentary on Lee's [2006] critique from Searle's [1995, 1998] philosophical, social constructivist perspective of the FASB's recent principles versus rules initiative. Lee argues that standard setters ignore [or are ignorant of] the philosophical issues underpinning this issue and that until they come to grips with this the initiative, their efforts will remain only a cunning plan to legitimate the profession's standard setting activities to the public. This paper, contra Lee, speculates that philosophically the issue goes well beyond a brute reality versus a socially constructed reality. The paper draws on several strands of linguistically oriented philosophy, including Frankfurt's [2005] insightful book, On Bullshit, to analyze the accountant's agency in preparing financial statements. The paper concludes that if economic income and capital do not exist as brute realties independently of their representation, then accountants can be justified in ignoring [or being indifferent towards] the truth or falseness of these accounts. If there is no bottom line, no final truth, existing prior to the accounting for them, then philosophically it makes no sense to accuse the accountant of violating the representational faithfulness conceptual framework axiom. The paper gestures towards the bigger issue of how the global capital market relies on such ungrounded accounting reports.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.