Principles and rules: the open question argument and normative imperatives

Alex Arthur

International Journal of Critical Accounting, 2009, vol. 1, issue 4, 313-326

Abstract: The 'rules vs. principles' debate reappearing in the accounting literature has parallels in many disciplines and thematic links to many more. The purpose of this paper is to consider some of these links and to suggest an explanatory taxonomy based on the 'open question argument' drawn from analytic philosophy and some distinctions made by algorithmic theorists. This framework helps to explain some empirical findings and, perhaps, lends credibility to professional preconceptions (Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland, 2006).

Keywords: rules; principles; regulation; financial reporting; standard setting; analytic philosophy; jurisprudence; algorithmics; language; truth; open question argument; paradox; Wittgenstein; normative imperatives. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2009
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=28058 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ids:ijcrac:v:1:y:2009:i:4:p:313-326

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in International Journal of Critical Accounting from Inderscience Enterprises Ltd
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sarah Parker ().