Intersubjectivity — the challenge and opportunity for accounting☆

The purpose of this paper is to study the origin, nature, and characteristics of the framework used by critics of various public accounting experts. In this article, I will mainly focus on three questions. (2) Do you know from a specialized answer how the problem is recognized? (3) Can the current reaction model lead a profession? Our analysis identifies two different frameworks that are the basis for criticism of occupations. We regard these as the viewpoints of "rational scientist" and "humanist philosopher". These frameworks differ in how we address phenomena between subjects. The difference in conceptual objectivity is particularly evident. As a result, this occupation is in a position to deal with a series of important criteria without being framed by an agreement, caught between the intersections of these ideas. Unfortunately, they seem to be more inclined to the objective position of "rational scientists" that may exacerbate their difficulties.

I would like to thank my colleagues and UCLA conference participants for writing this article. In particular, the insights of Jan Oliver improved ideas and presentations. Lauren Newton and Anthony Tinker have compiled several useful proposals. Many of the ideas here come from the previous collaboration with Sam Culbert.

Considering the mutual participation of circle and language exchange between this subject matter, how do we interpret individual theme? The basis of "inter-subject project" shared by Hubermas theorists with Buber and Mead not only offset the exaggerated subjective prejudice in philosophical philosophy but also overwhelming in collective overwhelming social norms It is to avoid individuals. Therefore depriving individualized autonomy and spontaneity. Subjectiveism is aimed at creating an intermediate process between Descartes subjectiveism and Marxistic collectivism extremes (Voloshinov, 1996).

This process is fundamentally basic. These ontologies present a consistent relationship in which relationships are dominant and relationships are composed of those relationships. Subjectivity overrides subjectivity (meaning Descartes) in this ontology. Of course, in these alternative ontologies as well, subjectivity is based on subjectivity of "essential experience". Experiencing identity is a necessary condition between subjectivity, but the form of individual subjects (how to form and process intrinsicities in individual subjects) is not necessary - and in the case of Whitehead and Buddhism There is no need for existing flutes Curl body. These formats are widely recognized as central experiences in the interaction between subjects and the flow of facts and are individual subjects.