Changed rules theory and the evolution of accountancy - a comment

Abstract

In a recent article Birkin et al.(1997) proposed that Changed Rules Theory should provide the appropriate inner logic to drive accounting, in lieu of Social Darwinism. In this comment I take issue with the dichotomy between Darwinism and Changed Rules Theory. I show that both of Changed Rules Theory and Darwinism, when correctly presented, lead to the perspectives the authors recommend.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Rule consistency.Jaap Hage - 2000 - Law and Philosophy 19 (3):369-390.
Order relations among efficient decision rules.Jacob Paroush - 1997 - Theory and Decision 43 (3):209-218.
Three prepositional calculi of probability.Herman Dishkant - 1980 - Studia Logica 39 (1):49 - 61.
Rules for reasoning.Richard E. Nisbett (ed.) - 1993 - Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Moral rules.Russ Shafer-Landau - 1997 - Ethics 107 (4):584-611.
Conflicts of Rules in Hooker’s Rule-Consequentialism.Ben Eggleston - 2007 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 37 (3):329-349.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
3 (#1,650,745)

6 months
1 (#1,459,555)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references