بررسی اصل برائت و اصل عدم در فقه امامیه

•   آرشیو : نسخه پاییز 1396
•   موضوع : موضوعی تعریف نشده!
• نویسنده/گان : فاطمه کوه میشی
•   چکیده :
  تئوری انتقادی جنبشی فکری-فلسفی است که به دنبال نقد جامعه و فرهنگ در سرتاسر علوم اجتماعی و انسانی می‌پردازد. که دارای دو معنای کاملاً مختلف با ریشه‌های متفاوت است. یکی ریشه در جامعه‌شناسی و دیگری ریشه در نقد ادبی دارد؛ که در بخش جامعه‌شناسی تئوری غالب در مکتب فرانکفورت که نگاهی انتقاد آمیز به استفاده ابزاری از علم و فلسفه دارد و پیشرفت های علمی را وسیله ای برای رهایی انسان می داند .در بخش نقد ادبی دیدگاهی به آینده پژوهی و اینده نگری دارد و می کوشد با تلفیق دو جریان فکری اثبات گرا و تعبیری؛ با گذر از این دو گانگی در ساختار ، ادارکی گسترده در مسیر مشارکت کنشگران در تکامل اجتماعی پدید ار شود. نظریه انتقادی تحت تاثیر مفاهیم نظریه پسا ساختارگرایانه و پسامدرن است.
  پژوهش پیش رو به بررسی مفهوم نظریه انتقادی پرداخته و بخصوص تاثیر و تاثر آن را در حسابداری در قالب یک پژوهش کتابخانه ای می پردازد . این پژوهش که براساس ساختار کتابخانه ای استوار می باشد برپایه خوانش ما از نوشته های موجود در مورد حسابداری و نظرات دیگر محققان در مورد نوشته های فیلسوف و طرفدار نهضت اصلاح گری جرمی بنتهام (1748-1832) می باشد . بنتهام براین باور بودکه شفافیت حسابداری باعث ارتقای پیشرفت اجتماعی و رفاه می شود، موردی است که ارزش مطالعه دارد، وبا معطوف کردن توجهش به نظارت بر امور اجتماعی, باعث ارتقای احتمال ذهنیت باز و شفافیت می شود؛ شفافیت مهمترین اصل نظارت است .در اینجا با نگاهی منتقدانه به موضوع مورد پژوهش نگاه شده است .
•   کلید واژه : تئوری انتقادی ، مکتب فرانکفورت ، آینده پژوهی ، حسابداری انتقادی
•   Title : Critical theory in accounting is based on the mass view of Jeremy Bentham
•   Abstract :
  Critical theory is an intellectual-philosophical movement that seeks to critique society and culture throughout the social sciences and humanities. Which has two completely different meanings with different roots. One is rooted in sociology and the other is rooted in literary criticism; It takes a look at futurism and futurism and tries to combine these two positivist and interpretive currents of thought; by going through this dichotomy in structure, a broad administration is created in the path of actors' participation in social evolution. Critical theory is influenced by the concepts of poststructuralist and postmodern theory.
  The present study examines the concept of critical theory and deals in particular with its impact on accounting in the form of a library study. This research, which is based on the library structure, is based on our reading of existing writings on accounting and other scholars' views on the writings of the philosopher and proponent of the Jeremy Bentham Reform Movement (1748-1832). Bentham believed that accounting transparency promotes social progress and well-being, which is worth studying, and by focusing on social affairs, it promotes the possibility of open mindedness and transparency; transparency is the most important principle of oversight. A critical look has been made at the subject.
•   مراجع :
  Adams, C. A. and G. Harte (2000). “Making discrimination visible: the potential of social accounting,”
  Accounting Forum, 24(1): 56–79.
  Agger, B. (1992). The Discourse of Domination: From the Frankfurt School to Postmodernism, Evanston, IL:
  Northwestern University Press.
  Akinkummi, A. and K. Murray (1997). “Inadequacies in the Mental Health Act, 1983 in relation to mentally disordered remand prisoners,” Medicine, Science and the Law, 37(1): 53–7.
  Anonymous (1832). An Address to the British Public by the Saint Simonian Missionaries, London: Rolandi,
  Bossange, Barthes and Lowell, MA: Effngham and Wilson.
  Attridge, D., G. Bennington and R. Young (1987) (eds). Post-structuralism and the Question of History,
  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  Bahmueller, C. (1981). The National Charity Company: Jeremy Bentham’s Silent Revolution, Berkeley, CA:
  University of California Press.
  Barker, C. (2003). Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice, London: Sage Publications.
  Beck, U. (2015). The Reinvention of Politics: Rethinking Modernity and the Global Social Order, Oxford: John
  Wiley and Sons.
  Benhabib, S. (1986). Critique, Norm and Utopia: A Study of the Foundations of Critical Theory, New York:
  Columbia University Press.
  Bentham, J. (1797). Pauper Management Improved: Particularly by Means of an Application of the Panopticon
  Principle of Construction, London (frst published 1797 in Arthur Young’s Annals of Agriculture, frst published separately, 1812, London, from which the quotations are taken).
  Bentham, J. (1816). Chrestomathia, London.
  Best, S. (1995). The Politics of Historical Vision: Marx, Foucault, Habermas, New York: Guilford Press.
  Best, S. and D. Kellner (1997). The Postmodern Turn, New York: Guilford Press.
  Blake, K. (1997). “Bleak House, political economy, Victorian studies,” Victorian Literature and Culture, 25(1):
  1–21.
  Boralevi, C. L. (1984). Bentham and the Oppressed, Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.
  Bowring, J. (1877). Autobiographical Recollections of Sir John Bowring with a brief memoir by Lewin B. Bowring,
  London: Henry S. King.
  Boyne, R. (2000). “Post-Panopticism,” Economy and Society, 29(2): 285–307.
  Breckman, W. (2013). Adventures of the Symbolic: PostMarxism and Radical Democracy, New York: Columbia
  University Press.
  Bronner, S. E. (1994). Of Critical Theory and Its Theorists, Oxford: Blackwell.
  Calhoun, C. (1992) (ed.). Habermas and the Public Sphere, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  Calhoun, C. (1995). Critical Social Theory: Culture, History and the Challenge of Theory, Oxford: Blackwell.
  Caplan, J. (1989). “Postmodernism, poststructuralism and deconstruction: notes for historians,” Central
  European History, 22 (3–4): 260–78.
  Connolly, W. (1988). Political Theory and Modernity, Oxford: Blackwell.
  Cooper, C., P. Taylor, N. Smith and L. Catchpowle (2005). “A discussion of the political potential of social
  accounting,” Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 16(7): 952–74.
  Cousins, M. (1987). “The practice of historical investigation,” in D. Attridge, G. Bennington and R. Young
  (eds): Post-structuralism and the Question of History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  Crimmins, J. E. (1994). “Bentham’s political radicalism re-examined,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 55(2):
  259–81.
  Crimmins, J. E. (1996). “Contending interpretations of Bentham’s utilitarianism,” Canadian Journal of
  Political Science – Revue Canadienne de Science Politique, 29(4): 751–77.
  Critchley, S. and O. Marchart (2004). Laclau: A Critical Reader, London: Psychology Press.
  Crump, S. (1995). “Towards action and power: post-enlightenment pragmatism?” Discourse: Studies in the
  Cultural Politics of Education, 16(2): 203–17.
  Cullen, M. J. (1975). The Statistical Movement in Early Victorian Britain: The Foundation of Empirical Social
  Research, Hassocks: Harvester Press.
  Cumming, I. (1961). Useful Learning: Bentham’s Chrestomathia with Particular Reference to the Influence of James
  Mill on Bentham, University of Auckland, Bulletin No. 56, Ed. Series No. 3.
  Derrida, J. (1996). “Remarks on deconstruction and pragmatism,” in C. Mouffe (ed.): Deconstruction and
  Pragmatism, London and New York: Routledge.
  Dinwiddy, J. (1989). Bentham, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  Evans, E. J. (1983).The Forging of the Modern State: Early Industrial Britain, 1783-1870, 2e, London: Longman.
  Foot, P. (1984). Red Shelley, London: Bookmarks.
  Foucault, M. (1977a). “L’oeil de pouvoir, preface to Bentham, J. Le Panoptique,” Paris: Belfond.
  Foucault, M. (1977b).Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, translated by A. Sheridan, Harmondsworth,
  UK: Penguin Books.
  Gallhofer, S. and J. Haslam (1991). “The aura of accounting in the context of a crisis: Germany and the First
  World War,” Accounting, Organizations and Society, 16(5–6): 487-520.
  Gallhofer, S. and J. Haslam (1993). “Approaching corporate accountability: fragments from the past,”
  Accounting and Business Research, 23(s1): 32–30.
  Gallhofer, S. and J. Haslam (1994a). “Accounting and the Benthams: accounting as negation,” Accounting
  Business and Financial History, 4(2): 293–73.
  Gallhofer, S. and J. Haslam (1994b). “Accounting and the Benthams: or, accounting’s potentialities,”
  Accounting, Business and Financial History, 4(3): 431–60.
  Gallhofer, S. and J. Haslam (1995). “Accounting and modernity,” Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 6:
  203–32.
  Gallhofer, S. and J. Haslam (1996). “Analysis of Bentham’s chrestomathia: or, towards a critique of accounting education,” Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 7(1–2): 13–31.
  Gallhofer, S. and J. Haslam (2003). Accounting and Emancipation: Some Critical Interventions, London and New
  York: Routledge.
  Gallhofer, S. and J. Haslam (2006). “Mobilising accounting in the radical media during the First World War
  and its aftermath: the Case of Forward in the context of red Clydeside,” Critical Perspectives on Accounting,
  17(2): 224–52.
  Gallhofer, S. and J. Haslam (2008). “The possibilities of accounting in the global context: critical reflections on the internet as a new technology of communication,” in M. Lada and A. Kozarkiewicz (eds):
  Rachunkowosc: w otoczeniu nowych technologii, Warsaw: Beck.
  Gallhofer, S., J. Haslam and A. Yonekura (2015). “Accounting as differentiated universal for emancipatory
  praxis: accounting delineation and mobilization for emancipation(s) recognising democracy and difference,” Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 28(5): 846–74.
  Gambling, T. (1974). Societal Accounting, London: George Allen and Unwin.
  Goldberg, L. (1957). “Jeremy Bentham: critic of accounting method,” Accounting Research, 8: 218–45.
  Grossberg, L. (1986). “History, politics and postmodernism: Stuart Hall and cultural studies,” Journal of
  Communication Inquiry, 10(2): 61–77.
  Habermas, J. (1992). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois
  Society, translated by T. Burger with the assistance of F. Lawrence, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  Harrison, R. (1983). Bentham, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
  Hart, H. L. A. (1982). Essays on Bentham’s Jurisprudence and Political Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  Hartley, D. (1998). “In search of structure: theory and practice in the management of education,” Journal of
  Education Policy, 13(1): 153–62.
  Held, D. and A. McGrew (2000) (eds). The Global Transformation Reader: An Introduction to the Globalization
  Debate, Cambridge: Polity Press in association with Blackwell.
  Himmelfarb, G. (1968). “The Haunted House of Jeremy Bentham,” in G. Himmelfarb (ed.):Victorian Minds,
  New York: Knopf.
  Hoskin, K. and R. Macve (1986). “Accounting and the examination: a genealogy of disciplinary power,”
  Accounting, Organizations and Society, 11(2): 105–36.
  Howarth, D., A. Norval and Y. Stravrakis (2002) (eds). Discourse Theory and Political Analysis, Manchester:
  Manchester University Press.
  Hume, L. (1970). “The development of industrial accounting: the Benthams’ contribution,” Journal of
  Accounting Research, 8(1): 21–33.
  Hume, L. (1981). Bentham and Bureaucracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  Kolb, D. (1986). The Critique of Pure Modernity: Hegel, Heidegger and After, Chicago IL: University of Chicago
  Press.
  Laclau, E. (1990). New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Times, London: Verso.
  Laclau, E. (1996). Emancipation(s), London: Verso.
  Laclau, E. and C. Mouffe (1987). “Post-Marxism without apologies,” New Left Review, 166: 79–106.
  Laclau, E. and C. Mouffe (2001). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics, 2e,
  London: Verso.
  Landry, L. Y. (2000). Marx and the Postmodern Debates: An Agenda for Critical Theory, Santa Barbara, CA:
  Praeger Publishing.
  Laughlin, R. C. (1995). “Empirical research in accounting: alternative approaches and a case for ‘middlerange’ thinking,” Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8(1): 63–87.
  Lechte, J. (2006).Fifty Key Contemporary Thinkers: From Structuralism to Postmodernity, London and New York:
  Routledge.
  Lehman, G. (2001). “Reclaiming the public sphere: problems and prospects for corporate social and environmental accounting,” Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 12(6): 713–33.
  Letwin, S. R. (1965). The Pursuit of Certainty: David Hume, Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, Beatrice Webb,
  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  Liu, A. (2009). Local Transcendence: Essays on Postmodern Historicism and the Database, Chicago, IL: University
  of Chicago Press.
  Loft, A. (1988). Understanding Accounting in its Historical and Social Context: The Case of Cost Accounting in
  Britain, 1914-1925, New York: Garland.
  Long, D. (1987). “Bentham as revolutionary social scientist,” Man Nature, 6: 115–45.
  Lyons, D. (1991). In the Interest of the Governed: A Study of Bentham’s Principle of Utility and Law, revised edition, New York: Oxford University Press.
  Mack, M. P. (1962). Jeremy Bentham: An Odyssey of Ideas, 1748-1792, London: Heinemann
  Mouffe, C. (1993). The Return of the Political, London: Verso.
  Parashar, A. (2008). “Re-conceptualizing regulation, responsibility and law,”Macquarie Law Journal, 8: 59–77.
  Parekh, B. (1993) (ed.). Jeremy Bentham: Critical Assessments, London: Routledge.
  Patterson, T. (1989). “Post-structuralism, post-modernism: implications for historians,” Social History, 14(1):
  83–8.
  Pieterse, J. N. (1992). “Emancipations, modern and postmodern,” Development and Change, 23(3): 5–41.
  Pitkin, H. F. (1990). “Slippery Bentham: some neglected cracks in the foundations of utilitarianism,”Political
  Theory, 18(1): 104–31.
  Polanyi, K. (1945). Origins of Our Time: The Great Transformation, London: Victor Gollancz.
  Postema, G. J. (1988). “Bentham’s equality-sensitive utilitarianism,” Utilitas, 1(1): 41–61
  Radin, M. J. and F. Michelman (1991). “Pragmatist and poststructuralist critical legal practice,” University of
  Pennsylvania Law Review, 139(4): 1019–38.
  Rosen, F. (1982). “Jeremy Bentham: recent interpretations,” Political Studies, 30(4): 575–81.
  Russell, B. (1962). History of Western Philosophy and its Connection with Political and Social Circumstances from
  the Earliest Times to the Present Day, London: Allen and Unwin.
  Schöttler, P. (1989). “Historians and discourse analysis,” History Workshop Journal, 27(1): 37–65.
  Semple, J. (1993). Bentham’s Prison: A Study of the Panopticon Penitentiary, New York: Oxford.
  Twining, W. (1989). Reading Bentham, London: British Academy.
  Veron, J. (1994). “Who is afraid of the linguistic turn – the politics of social history and its discontents,”
  Social History, 19(1): 81–97.
  Williams, R. (1987). Culture and Society: Coleridge to Orwell, London: The Hogarth Press.
  Young, R. (1990). White Mythologies: Writing History and the West, London and New York: Routledge.
  Zadek, S., P. Pruzan and R. Evans (1997) (eds). Building Corporate Accountability: Emerging Practices in Social
  and Ethical Accounting, Auditing and Reporting, London: Earthscan Publications.
  Žižek, S. (2001).Did Somebody Say Totalitarianism? Five Interventions in the (Misuse) of a Notion, London: Verso.
•  صفحات : 91-100
•   دانلود فایل ( 586 KB )