Análise das demonstrações contábeis da Associação Chapecoense de

Futebol

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.9771/rcufba.v17i1.55133

DATA VALIDATION AND SCIENTIFIC ASSUMPTION OF IMPARTIALITY IN

ACCOUNTING BY HORKHEIMER’S VERSTAND

João Gabriel Nascimento de Araújo Francisco José Sobreira de Matos

ASCES-UNITA UFPE
j_gabriel90@hotmail.com franzeh@hotmail.com

Tiago de Moura Soeiro Umbelina Cravo Teixeira Lagioia

UFAL UFPE
mourasoeiro@gmail.com umbelinalagioia@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
This essay aimed to discuss by Horkheimer’s perspective of instrumental reason (verstand),
aspects related to data validation and impartiality in accounting research. This essay was divided
in three sections following such a line of arguments: first we adopted an analytical methodology
to study the relationship between positivism and accounting, and later, we used an hermeneutic
methodology to analyze the phenomenon of accounting data by the Critical Theory of Horkheimer.
In proposing the denial of absolute truth, Adorno & Horkheimer (1985) distinguishes two reasons:
Verstand (instrumental reason) and Vernunft (substantial reason). The Verstand, as an expression
of modernity and it science, is the character of reason purely formal, operational, ordering data. In
other words, Verstand is the idea that the truth is known, or which must first seek a formula to put
into practice only after. On the other hand, Vernunft is a dialectical reason, a temporary fact, due
to historical factors. Through Vernunft is possible to question the unquestionable, overcome the
conclusive truth and objective authority. Thus, we show briefly an evolutionary view of accounting
in order to highlight the development of accounting thought until a traditional theoretical
perspective adopted. Then we make a counterpoint to this traditional perspective by verstand. In
our discussion, we claim from researchers a choice between vernunft or verstand and make clear
the data limitations into interpretations inside instrumental idea. We do not intend to propose in
this article any ways to change the current paradigm in accounting. On the contrary, supported in
Adorno (2009) displays as negative dialectics, this article aims solely to foster and mature debate,
supported the substantial reason (Vernunft). As a result, by adding the verstand perspective in
accounting research some interesting insights and interpretation will be provided by future
research. In so doing, we expect a special attention to epistemological position which improve the
data validation.

Keywords: Data Validation and Impartiality. Positivism. Horkheimer. Critical Theory.

Recebido em 22/06/2023. Editor responsável: José Maria Dias Filho

1
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-18, e2312, 2023
 Data validation and scientific assumption of impartiality in accounting by
Horkheimer’s Verstand

1. INTRODUCTION

This essay aimed to discuss accounting data validation and the scientific assumption of
its impartiality by the critical perspective based on Max Horkheimer’ thinking about Verstand
and Vernunft concepts.
In Horkheimer's view, it is a subjective, formal and instrumental reason, linked to
immediacy, classification and deduction. Its validation criterion is its practical application. In
subjective reason, ends are no longer a common good. They became a contingent end, as the
subject was settled in a pragmatic vision of reality (Braga Junior, 2023).
There is a need to distinguish between the types of reason used: subjective reason with
objective (instrumental) reason. Subjective reason is more anachronistic because it is capable
of determining its ends by not being carried away by immediacy (Braga Junior, 2023).
While instrumental reason would be one that only considers the world as an essentially
technical object of manipulation. In this modality, the most effective means are used to achieve
a given end, while the end itself, on the contrary, is not the object of any rationalization
(Gebhardt, 1993; Horkheimer, 2000).
Data validation in this essay has to be understood by Horkheimer's view that, opposing
the positivist epistemological view, its validation should not be understood as an essentially
technical object of manipulation, on the other hand, serving a more noble purpose, that of
intervening and transforming the reality in which the individual lives. In turn, scientific
assumption of impartiality has to be understood as the traditional positivist concern that data
are neutral and self-explanatory (Braga Junior, 2023).
This is on the assumption, inherent in the critical perspective, that it is impossible to reach
an undoubted information by the instrumental reason, just fragments of this data. Starting from
a traditional historical review of accounting as a science, we intend to discuss the distortions of
subjectivity reason and sociohistorical context caused in certain phenomena and results
obtained, so that it reaches a certain number because this truth seen as purely rational and
objective has some theoretical inconsistencies.
The classical accounting theory would leave some axioms not entirely true, that there is
fairness, rationality and neutrality around the accounting. This transforms the accounting in a
paradigm that goes against the specificity and complexity of events; which turns in the same
the different; which makes any new attempts in a reproduction for paradigmatic status quo. In
other words, this traditional view of accounting prevents the emergence of something new,
since this "new" has to be limited to the framework of an existing paradigm.
Sciences that do not deal in them, who do not question or constantly revisit their axioms
and paradigms, and your effects against the phenomena, indicate a willingness (and faith) to
remain under the pillars that gave birth, which can lead to serious limitations both practice and
theory. Transforming the phenomenon in its contextual complexity of being inserted into a
society with ethical concepts, morals, ideologies, concepts of justice, values, beliefs in a mere
desideratum, twisted to force the method to get the proper result the dominant theory. In this
way, this essay finds its justification in raising a counterpoint to the dominant positivist view
of accounting research. As a contribution, this essay brings to the debate Max Horkheimer point
of view, since it allows us to clarify what is meant by indisputable truth about accounting
information. By this way of thinking, many implications would be highlighted due to bringing
back to human beings a critical way of thinking by substantive reasons recognizing that
accounting numbers are a construction and not something exact. This would have implications

2
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 João Gabriel Nascimento de Araújo, Francisco José Sobreira de Matos,
Tiago de Moura Soeiro, Umbelina Cravo Teixeira Lagioia

for the preparation and interpretation of financial reports by accountants and users of accounting
information.
As a theoretical essay, throughout this manuscript, we will carry the such line of argument
in its development: We will take for the first part of this paper the analytical methodology,
which involves the study and in-depth evaluation of available information in an attempt to
explain the context of the relationship between positivism and accounting, and later, we will
make use of hermeneutic methodology, trying to analyze the phenomenon of accounting data
from many perspectives and complexities, as the basis for a critique of traditional concepts of
accounting by the Critical Theory of Horkheimer.
Before proceeding, we consider it important that: (1) although we propose to question the
validity of the data and the scientific impartiality of the positivist view, defended by other
authors such as Chua (1986) and Baker & Bettner (1997), we are not discussing the designs and
methodological procedures (e.g. quantitative or qualitative research), but the assumption of the
positivist argument of not questioning the subjectivity inherent in scientific research, especially
social research; and (2) Horkeimer's critical perspective, even the Frankfurt School, should not
be understood here as the only alternative to positivism, since there is a vast literature with
alternatives that oppose this dominant view (e.g. Ryan, Scapens & Theobald, 2002; Merchant,
2010; Parker, 2012) - the perspective adopted here aims to be one of the possible ones to
contribute to the debate, which is why we will not add other perspectives throughout the text,
since our choice is to oppose the positivist view.

2. ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION OF ACCOUNTING: A TRADITIONAL THEORETICAL

PERSPECTIVE

Although rudimentary accounting procedures and techniques have been dated to around
4.000 BC, according to Hendriksen & Van Breda (1999), the systematization of accounting as
a tool to support the management coincides with the period of the Italian Renaissance. In this
sense, Andrade (2009) states that this period converges to a more organized business structure
and that this period can be considered a milestone in accounting as it is currently understood.
Also according to Andrade (2009), influenced by the empiricist philosophical bases of
Francis Bacon and John Locke, through which knowledge is accruing from the experiences,
Accounting, having essentially the factual knowledge, which is the application of base we had
in the renaissance period space to develop their techniques that persist to the present time, the
example of double entry. In this direction, Laughlin (1995) and Mattesich (1980) point out that
few researchers contend that empirical research in accounting is of central importance, a view
that gained strength during the 1970s, instead of the old paradigm of research, of regulatory
accounting.
No wonder the schools of accounting thought that began to systematize one foundation
body of what would be the Accounting and obtained greater influence were those that were a
knowledge predominantly economic-based with empiricist character, such as Contist School,
Controlist School, Economia Aziendale School, Patrimonialist School and, recently the North
American School (Hermann Junior, 1996; Schimidt & Santos, 2008; Andrade, 2009).
This way, the accounting practice and research roots is based on economic reality concept.
Therefore, many practitioners, researchers, and standard setting bodies believe that accounting
can achieve unbiased representation of economic reality (Maali & Jaara, 2014). In this
traditional epistemic held values, “Accounting used to be considered as a non- problematic tool

3
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 Data validation and scientific assumption of impartiality in accounting by
Horkheimer’s Verstand

and data source recording a pre-existing economic reality” (Suzuki, 2003).

At first, the accounting theory demanded the confirmation or refutation of existing
accounting practices. However, recently there is a more precise and well-defined interests
around a methodological process almost exclusively focused on empirical verification theories
(Glautier & Underdown, 2001).
The final assumption of Glautier & Underdown (2001). is that the dominant approaches
in accounting converge around the construction and development of a conceptual reference to
guide the accounting practice and the performance of financial professionals. Thus, although
the authors defend a wellness approach, do not escape the dominant paradigm that accounting
is based on empiricism, or in other words, in reality.
In turn, Mattessich (1995) questions the accounting ability to represent the reality, stating
that the perception that accounting tangency of reality is the social reality that should not be
confused with any other. However, according to the thought of Mattessich (1995), there are two
specific environments where the accounting representation acts: the empirical relational system
and the numerical relational system.
Still, when presenting its conditional-normative conceptual representation in accounting,
Mattessich (1995) assumes that the positive sources of accounting are able to represent the
economic reality, if applied with methodological rigor.
It is noticed so that although act even heterogeneous current of thought in accounting
called critical thinking, accounting (as well as all the sciences that structured and still are based
on positivism) has a dominant view that the human mind is capable to mirror reality with
property (Ribeiro Filho, Lopes, Feitosa, & Pederneiras, 2009).
This predominance can be seen reflected, as an example, in IAS 1 which is standardized
basic conceptual statement. This standard is the basis for all the others, which is placed that
reliable accounting information, needs to be complete, neutral and free of errors. In other words,
it folds up the understanding that the information produced by the accounting is always being
the most complete and possible bias-free.
Moreover, Kam (1990) states that the starting point or the core of accounting theory goes
through what he calls the theory of measurement which in turn involves the binding of a formal
system, the number system with aspects events or goals from the use of semantic rules. The
measurement becomes possible due to an isomorphic relationship of similarity between certain
characteristics of the numerical system as disclosed in the mathematical model, relationships
between objects or events with respect to the given property. Among the various types of
measurement approached by Kam (1990), there is a discretionary measure, which requires an
arbitrary allocation of numbers and that this measurement is, in general, found in accounting,
much under the regulatory, legal and normative systems that impose a "measurement by
decree".
Ribeiro Filho et al. (2009) reinforces that accounting still needs a consolidation in its
scientific paradigms in order to avoid discretion, which impacts the accuracy of the numerical
assignment and even the very number found.
It can be seen through this brief classic historical concept, that accounting as a science
and consequently research and practice, has its dominants roots in the positivism – here we are
dealing with the philosophical positivism, which should not be confused with what is called
accounting positivism (or positivist research in accounting) – and empiric, and it is directly
reflected in the tireless search for numerical accuracy, data validation and informational
impartiality.

4
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 João Gabriel Nascimento de Araújo, Francisco José Sobreira de Matos,
Tiago de Moura Soeiro, Umbelina Cravo Teixeira Lagioia

3. A CRITICAL COUNTERPOINT TO ACCOUNTING POSITIVISM UNDER

HORKHEIMER’S PERSPECTIVE

According to Bassani (2014), Horkheimer in his works shows the relevance of what he
defines as an interdisciplinary program, pointing to the need for unification of the sciences and
philosophy. However, in Horkheimer view of this junction it is not a purely theoretical
approach, by contrast, is a demand that has its origin in response to marginalization and
irrelevance about social problems given by other approaches. Within these approaches is the
so-called positivist science, which has its apex in the thoughts of Auguste Comte.
Barra (2008) affirms that the positivist method is the method that permeates the
organization of thought, whether in scientific production in force at the University, the influence
in public and government organizations such as political parties, educational systems,
industries, means of mass communication, among others. It must be noted that the spread of
positivism in social organizations is a camouflaged form reproducing power systems, social
ideology and maintaining the status quo.
This positivist science assumes the role of making absolute the sensible to the detriment
of the theory in the form of suppression of dichotomy appearance/essence, through what can be
defined as intuition and also to consider the laws of nature as invariable. Thus, positivism,
restricts knowledge to sensory experiences, the simple fact checking, which has already always
meaning itself. Knowledge is facing and acquires its validity, then in particular. This position
makes positivism is not only determined by its object, but also leads to imbue is the subjectivity
of the subject, to transfer and retain the temporality in the subject, ignoring the relationship
between subject and object dialectically (Bassani, 2014).
In positivism, knowledge and reality are taken as being the same thing, in other words,
positivism takes the origin and condition of knowledge as the same reality: sensitive
experiences. Knowledge, in the positivist manner, is characterized by trying to be ahistorical,
tying his search for universal principles and concepts (Bassani, 2014).
One of the major pillars of the positivist perspective is the belief stemmed from ingenuous
empiricism: the possibility of immediate access to empirical data, place of all truth.
This idea comes from the assumption, questioned throughout modernity (from the
skepticism of Hume to phenomenology of Hegel, through idealism of Kant), of a kind of belief
the observation is not influenced by nothing more than their own external object.
Against empiricism, Kant affirms that there are ends proper to culture, ends proper to
reason. Indeed, only the cultural ends of reason can be described as absolutely final. “The final
end is not an end which nature would be competent to realize or produce in terms of its idea,
because it is one that is unconditioned” (Deleuze, 1984, p. 18).
Ingenuous empiricists, to not thematize what it means and what influences the concept of
observation, turns the desire for objectivity in a new metaphysical argument. This form of
empiricism based the idea of objectivity in knowledge at the thought of possibility of immediate
access to an external object in your exteriority, not considering important the distortions caused
by subjectivity, historical and social contexts, beliefs or ideologies. In this way, it would be
possible to start true knowledge, simply logically chaining the data obtained from a faith in
immediate access to sensitive reality.
It can be clearly seen in accounting in their relentless pursuit of empirical knowledge,

5
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 Data validation and scientific assumption of impartiality in accounting by
Horkheimer’s Verstand

specifically from the 1970s, and before that, the normative knowledge. Although they have
some change in their concepts, both have in common the same paradigm, positivism. Derived
from this empiricism (and normalization) the relentless pursuit of standards, metrics, and said
unbiased numerical explanations. About it, Horkheimer (1973) states that the very logical
operations are already rationalized to the point that, at least in much of science forming theories
became mathematical construction - This is the great object of modernity: a theory, a method
that can even think/thing. Therefore, the modern fixation on mathematics, it gives security and
certainty almost absolute. However, at what costs we limit part of the phenomenon to turn it
into numbers?
The theory of knowledge of Locke, your empiricism, is an example of this deceptive
lucidity of style that reconciles opposites simply deleting the nuances. Locke's work was not
taken too closely discriminate between sensual experience and rational and between the
atomistic and structured (Horkheimer, 1973).
Thus the positivist science, since it abandons the criticism and revisiting the axioms,
aiming for neutrality and impartiality to achieve the objective validity, creates his own prison
next to the sphere of faith in empirical data, entering a kind of circularity in believes staring at
information obtained from unenlightened concepts, fixed and fetishists, while these could be
clarified by incorporating the dynamics of the facts (Horkheimer, 1993).
Subsequently, the content of reason is reduced arbitrarily to the scope of merely a part of
this content, to the frame of only one of its principles; the particular pre-empts the place of the
universal (...) Having given up autonomy, reason has become an instrument. In the formalistic
aspect of subjective reason, stressed by positivism, its unrelatedness to objective content is
emphasized; in its instrumental aspect, stressed by pragmatism, its surrender to heteronomous
contents is emphasized. Reason has become completely harnessed to the social process. Its
operational value, its role in the domination of men and nature, has been made the sole criterion
(Horkheimer, 2004).
This abandonment of critical and autonomy transforms reason - before an essential
instrument of seeking truth, understanding of universal/essential or complex contexts - in an
instrumental reason purely, which works only on the adequacy of the data to the default settings
or models; a strictly peaceful reason, subordinate to the dominant status quo and engaged in in
their reproduction. The more ideas become automatic and instrumentalized the less we can see
in them thoughts with a meaning of their own (Horkheimer, 2004).
The task, therefore, which Horkheimer proposed, was to refute these aspects, proposing
and returning as output materialism and interdisciplinary program. According to Horkheimer
(1972) the materialist theory is not limited to sensitive and that even the biological unit
responsible for cognition changes with historical changes. Moreover, distinguishing
materialism even more positivism, Horkheimer uproots the question about the value neutrality
raised by positivism on the lines of the limiting notion of knowledge sensitive. For positivism,
to not pursue issues that could not be resolved, remain impartial. For materialism, despite the
knowledge limit, no area should be ignored. Since positivism to pursue deliberately the most
extreme objectivity, purified of all subjective projections, however, only entangles itself more
and more in particular of an instrumental reason, which has a strongly subjectivist nature
(Adorno, 1999). “At the same time, however, its neutrality means the wasting away of its real
spirit, its relatedness to truth, once believed to be the same in science, art, and politics, and for
all mankind” (Horkheimer, 2004, p. 13).
Therefore, what Horkheimer proposes to oppose the positivism is not to ignore the
standards, metrics and validity of the data collected. The proposal involves understanding that
said neutrality and impartiality (quite rooted ideas in traditional accounting thinking) should
6
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 João Gabriel Nascimento de Araújo, Francisco José Sobreira de Matos,
Tiago de Moura Soeiro, Umbelina Cravo Teixeira Lagioia

not be treated as a knowledge limiter. Supported this proposal for Horkheimer, we can say then
that impartiality anchored in this empiricism in Accounting, is nothing more than a way to
bypass the search for problem solutions. In that connection, Horkheimer (1972, p. 39) states
that “we do not know everything does not mean at all that what we do know is the nonessential
and what we do know, the essential”. This is because positivism is a spirit of time, which as
introducing the absolute security that promises after the collapse of traditional metaphysics.
Moreover, it lends itself especially to ideological manipulation because of its indeterminacy
content, their ordering procedure, and the preference for certainty in the face of truth (Adorno,
1999).
The Horkheimer’s research program was guided, therefore, by the dialectic between
research (Forschung) and presentation (Darstellung), and the tasks performed by the
philosophy and the science well defined according to the characteristics of their own disciplines.
This is not, however, a disciplinary split into separate departments, or the simple juxtaposition
of the different areas in social research, but exactly their integration in constant collaboration,
despite the separation of procedures (Horkheimer, 1993).
The first task of this interdisciplinary program is to identify the problems raised by the
main philosophical and sociological debates – this step is fundamental to understanding the
context of the researcher not only the emergence of the problem, but the methods and axioms
that will connect, and in turn providing the second step possible distortion curve of the obtained
result. The second step would be to verify the ways in which research addressed these issues.
Then it would establish the criticism of these approaches, then reformulate the problem so that
it was possible to carry out an empirical research work in several areas, and here is part of
accounting. During this research process, following the idea of a constant collaboration among
researchers, complementary methods would be developed according to the presented question
(Horkheimer, 1993).
According to Bassani (2014), following this reasoning, keeping together in mind
obscurantism provided by positivism on the relationship between knowledge and interest and
the role of critical science with emancipatory intent, Habermas (1987) "unmasked" false
neutrality axiological self-affirmed by this stream of thought. To retrace the path of success of
positivism, Bassani (2014) states that the reflection of Habermas (1987) presents the historical
failure of a knowledge that invokes the real ahistorical to shield his scientific method against
any epistemic questioning.
With this, the Accounting interest that could be emancipatory becomes proactive,
ideational artifact, a sort of ideological simulacrum: knowledge is automated over interests of
society that actually support it. Supported in this transformation, the traditional Accounting
form an ideology in favor of maintaining the status quo (and hence power), there is a serious
question to do about the insistent search for affirmation of accounting data as impartial and
neutral information. Accounting as it appears disposes of its thinking function. The more the
concept of reason parse instrumentalized, the more easily it lends itself to ideological
manipulation and to propagation of the event lies. The advance of positivist enlightenment
dissolves the necessity of the idea of substantive reason - considered dogmatic and superstitious.
And the need to think beyond models, paradigms and common sense become fictions, loss of
time, which divert the science of its genuine development: expanding the knowledge, adjusting
data in the model of the truth that has been found (2004). In proposing the denial of absolute
truth, Adorno & Horkheimer (1985) distinguishes two reasons: Verstand (instrumental reason)
and Vernunft (substantial reason). The Verstand, as an expression of modernity and it science,
is the character of reason purely formal, operational, ordering data. In other words, Verstand is
the idea that the truth is known (or which must first seek a formula to put into practice only

7
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 Data validation and scientific assumption of impartiality in accounting by
Horkheimer’s Verstand

after). On the other hand, Vernunft is dialectical reason, a temporary fact, due to historical
factors. Through Vernunft is possible to question the unquestionable, overcome the conclusive
truth and objective authority.
The Verstand becomes advance thought, without the need to retrace the path that leads to
the search of thought itself, and as affirms Horkheimer (2000) as more ideas become automatic,
instrumental, unless someone sees them thoughts with their own meaning. They are considered
as things, machines, and that this violence or objectification allow the possibility of making a
difference in abstract identity, the living phenomenon in empirical data, the lack of questioning
of the axioms in objectivity and neutrality and arbitrarily result found in undoubted truth.
According to Adorno and Horkheimer (1985) the path taken by modern science (and here
includes accounting), which resulted in Verstand (instrumental reason) is related to
mathematized logic that follows the wake of technological progress of society. In other words,
it's like magic given by positivist (for accounting) was a spell which the most deluded is the
magic itself (the accounting user). Modern science, as understood by the positivists, essentially
it refers to statements regarding facts and presupposes, therefore, the objectification of life in
general and especially perception. That science sees the world as a world of facts and things
and neglects the need to link the transformation the world on facts and things with the social
process (Horkheimer, 1973). Attempting to progressive rationalization of all, as understood and
practiced in our civilization in search of an ideological concept of "progress", kills its own
substance of reason. This instrumental reason puts a greater priority order the ends and not the
means, a purely operative reason, trying to achieve results (by inference, deduction and
classification) by procedures that are more or less undoubted and presumed self-explained.
In addition, Adorno and Horkheimer (1985) affirms that when, in the mathematical
procedure, the unknown becomes the variable of an equation, he finds himself characterized it
as something very known for, even before it enters any amount. Nature is which it must be
grasped mathematically. Even what not it lets understand, indissolubility and irrationality, is
surrounded by mathematical theorems. It is the actual dominant vision about the accounting
data and accounting information. In this sense, Marcuse (1989) adds that since the reduction of
science to mathematics means the final renunciation of truth, as the mathematical formalism
leaves aside and prevents any understanding and critical use of facts.
Therefore, Chauí (2003) pointed that the competent discourse gets confused because, with
institutionally permitted or authorized language, that is, with a speech in which the interlocutors
have been previously recognized as having the right to speak and listen, in which the places and
circumstances have been predetermined to be allowed to speak and listen and, finally, in which
the content and form have been authorized according to the canons of the sphere of its
competence. "No doubt the logical fallacy in which the positivist position is based only reveals
his reverence for institutionalized science" (Horkheimer, 1973, p. 87).
Thus, Horkheimer, with the critique of positivism as the dominant and arbitrary theory of
the construction of objective validity, "imagined reorganize the philosophical reflection of the
time, from an abstract level to a more concrete level [...]", seeking the reasons a theory that
takes into account "the empirical and historical contributions of sociology and modern
historiography" in the construction of scientific work (Freitag, 1986, pp. 14-15). This critical
project does not disappear identity, she transforms qualitatively, preserving elements of the
object's affinity with his thinking, inaugurating a new modus operandi for scientific research.
Knowledge Proposed by Horkheimer - autonomous, critical and speculative Reason
(Vernunft) - opposes any epistemological attempt to reduce the objective basis of human
analysis to the mere formalization and classification of chaotic data into pre-existing theoretical
models. This thought aims to transpose the scientific work as operating to builder and critical
8
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 João Gabriel Nascimento de Araújo, Francisco José Sobreira de Matos,
Tiago de Moura Soeiro, Umbelina Cravo Teixeira Lagioia

of the realities; returning to science the necessity of thought universal, the totality, the criticism,
the importance of ideology in the construction of knowledge; guaranteeing autonomy to the
research and the possibility of a critical epistemology (Horkheimer, 2004).

4. SOME IMPLICATIONS OF THE POSITIVISM ON ACCOUNTING

The traditional way of accounting thinking is grounded in an abstract operation of rational

thinking mechanism. Thinking of the totality, the complexity of the phenomena, the man and
all his multitude of relationships (not only man of science, man of the economy) is set aside for
the alleged pursuit of objectivity and truth ideal for paths (methodologies) considered true and
beyond doubt.
On the other hand, the human dimension (of being in a totality of relations) is
instrumentalized in search results. No matter the place where you come from, the ideology that
believes, is born poor or rich, the country and culture where born, in a search to achieving the
result everything is instrumented in the twist of the phenomenon to an abstract methodology,
but the contraindication appears: loss the phenomenon in its relational complexity. Throughout
the section, we highlight the main critical reflections.
At this point accounting comes as a reproduction tool of the capitalist structure,
which in its distortions, sometimes leads to hunger, poverty, violence, segregation. Not even
the human is included in this methodological approach of accounting. There are only cold
numbers, depersonalization, twisting/death of the phenomenon by the violent inclusion of the
phenomenon to the method. Capitalism may even be good, but a science that helps it to
reproduce should also provide tools to recognize how numbers are produced, and at what price
and cost that accelerated growth comes. Instrumentalization/total objectification of nature, of
animals and humans by the coldness of the number is a major distortion of this model.
Briefly, this way of thinking is more concerned with the procedure, its validity and the
search of results that truly the analysis of the object/phenomena. We fail to think things to
think about and under procedures.
Over time, measurement bases has been discussed in several studies since the middle of
last century to the beginning of the present century, e.g., Edwards & Bell (1961), Chambers
(1966), Dyckman (1969), Ro (1980), Schaefer (1984), Ferguson & Wines (1986), Sutton
(1988), Zeff (2007), Ronen (2008), Whittington (2008) and Power (2010).
In this regard, Kam (1990) believes that the center of an accounting theory is the theory
of measurement. Deegan and Unerman (2011) recognize the importance of this debate and
wonder about what makes a base be more successful than others, if is the merit of argument or
the political interests. About it, Horkheimer (2004, p. 6) points that:
the present crisis of reason consists fundamentally in the fact that at a cesrtain point
thinking either became incapable of conceiving such objectivity at all or began to
negate it as a delusion. This process was gradually extended to include the objective
content of every rational concept. In the end, no particular reality can seem reasonable
perse; all the basic concepts, emptied of their content, have come to be only formal
shells.
At this point approached by Deegan & Unerman (2011), we see the strong influence of
positivism in accounting. The authors themselves, in spite of raising such questions, not very
deepened on it. Moreover, not deepen this kind of issues is a very strong trend observed in
accounting theory and, consequently, in their research and in their practice. It is perceived

9
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 Data validation and scientific assumption of impartiality in accounting by
Horkheimer’s Verstand

remoteness of deep questioning of what exists beyond the number, ideologies, theories, beliefs,
faith, transforms the scientist, while radical thinker (root origins) in operator and cataloguer.
“The acceptability of ideals, the criteria for our actions and beliefs, the leading principles
of ethics and politics, all our ultimate decisions are made to depend upon factors other than
reason” (Horkheimer, 2004, p. 16). That is, whom this data serves? Whom accounting filed
by the formalization and exploitation serves? Never put into question, since what matters
is the logical-rational internal validity, if the method was well spent, if the answer comes
is in accordance with the premises.
Also discussing the measurement in accounting, Kam (1990) points out that the
accounting information are mostly classified as discretionary (arbitrary). An example of this is
the Earnings Management, a management practice, based on accounting, by an economic
perspective. Scott (2011, p. 423) defines as “the choice by a manager of accounting policies, or
real actions, affecting earnings so as to achieve some specific reported earnings objective”. The
Earnings Management, started with the paper of Healy (1985) and has been studied by many
researchers, e.g., McNichols & Wilson (1998), Jones (1991), Holthausen, Larcker & Sloan
(1995), Bartov, Givoly & Hayn (2002), Skinner & Sloan (2002), Tucker & Zarowin (2006) and
Keung, Lin & Shih (2010).
What is common in all research cited on measurement in accounting and Earnings
Management – These two themes were chosen only as an example of the influence of positivism
in accounting. It should be understood that these examples are exhaustive – is the fact that both
discuss the number, mathematics. They seek a formula for, from there, to operationalize the
process. This is what Horkheimer defines by Verstand.
In this context, Hendriksen & Van Breda (1999) state that the implicit assumption in the
measurement basis is the best possible representation of reality. However, this statement
neglects the political aspects behind the number, power games already mentioned by
Horkheimer. Hendriksen & Van Breda (1999) assertion’s is another pointer to the influence of
positivism and Verstand in accounting. However, when considering Vernunft we have the
possibility of expanding the horizons of understanding of the phenomena and accounting
numbers.
It is important to point out that environmental accounting, while providing improved
social remains within the dominant paradigm, not acting thus as a promoter of profound changes
(Gray, Owen, & Adams, 1996). In an analogy, improve the living conditions of human slaves
can be considered a social improvement, but never a paradigm break, as this would be the end
of slavery – To a deep analysis about environmental accounting under critical perspective, see
Gray, Owen and Adams (1996). From this perspective, environmental accounting is presented
as mitigating (softening) of the problem. However, mitigation as solution never treat any
changes in paradigms.
The objectification and exploitation processes, removing intrinsic characteristics of
the phenomenon, treating them as thing, opens a wide range to spread distortions towards
a goal, a result to be achieved. On this way, another example about social and environmental
aspects in accounting came from the Second World War. The number of every Jew in the
Holocaust shows the coldness of the number to treat the human, turning into a serial number by
International Business Machines (IBM), the Nazi state was able to control and account for much
better lives and their deaths in the concentration camps (Lippman & Wilson, 2007). For
bureaucrats, Germany was not killing 100 Jews, but eliminating 100 numbers, which were a
cost to the state and brought problems to it – To a deep analysis about accounting in Nazi state,
see Lippman and Wilson (2007). Kill a number is easier than kill a man – Similarly, the
treatment of soldiers. Let the Jews hungry in train travel. When they opened the doors of the
10
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 João Gabriel Nascimento de Araújo, Francisco José Sobreira de Matos,
Tiago de Moura Soeiro, Umbelina Cravo Teixeira Lagioia

trains threw food on the floor, the Jews hungry ate the ground, and the officers showed the
German soldiers who were not actually men, but almost an animality. This objectification
facilitated treat Jews as things and promote and legitimize all manner of atrocity.
By not question some paradigms in accounting, some questions are drowned out. In
Vernunft reason, we should question things such as: what occurs in the backstage of the choice
of some basis and the rejection of others? What are the interests and implications (well beyond
those economic) behind the policies, rules and laws that affect the accounting? Who wins with
these choices? Who loses? Who benefits from the mistaken idea of fairness of accounting data?
Who harms? Whom accounting serves? Whom am I serving? Do I want to serve this? What are
the ethical, political and social implications on methodology/data found? As these data bind,
alter, affect, they reproduce 'external' context to this data?
This way, the attempting to progressive rationalization of all, as understood and practiced
in our civilization, in search of an ideological concept of "progress" kills the substance of
reason. This limited reason puts a greater priority order the ends and not the means, a purely
operative reason, trying to achieve results (by inference, deduction and classification) by
procedures more or less considered indubitable and presumed self-explanatory.
In this range thinking accounting, included in the group of social sciences, require a
separate type, distinct from those that drive the natural sciences. Accounting phenomena
can only be characterized by first there is a prior social definition of the concepts, models and
metrics. Basic accounting phenomena such as the occurrence of assets, liabilities, revenues and
expenses can only be discovered and analyzed it before there is any guideline set by people
(Ribeiro Filho, Lopes, Feitosa, & Pederneiras, 2009).
“Reason has never really directed social reality, but now reason has been so thoroughly
purged of any specific trend or preference that it has finally renounced even the task of passing
judgment on man's actions and way of life” (Horkheimer, 2004, p. 7). The instrumental reason
"naturalizes" the historical context, the dominant power relations, transforming the
rationality technical tool for adaptation to methodologies, contexts. Conforming "scientist"
to reality. The role of criticizing why we are so we do so, to do differently is considered
inappropriate behavior and even not rational. In this way, the concept of reason who needs
being recuperated, according Horkheimer (2004, p. 7) is “when the idea of reason was
conceived, it was intended to achieve more than the mere regulation of the relation between
means and ends: it was regarded as the instrument for understanding the ends, for determining
them”.
It is wrong, in the critical perspective by Horkheimer, believe that such concepts,
metrics and models present in accounting can be consequences of an objective, irrefutable
reality. All existing structures in accounting (doctrines, rules, policies and procedures) only
exist because they were designed by people who put all their emotional, educational, political
and historical when designed the parameters of accounting. Thus, neutrality and impartiality
act as dominant ideology, not as truth.
This view would make us reflect, e.g. on the accounting of tobacco and agrochemical
companies. Where they differ from the accounts produced by the Nazi IBM on the Jewish
extermination? Is it ethical to produce this accounting? Thus, the following reflections fits: what
the effects of dehumanization of reason and complex thinking? Who proves that accounting
knowledge is true? Do you need to be true that knowledge? Who said that their assumptions
are true? Not because it is dominant view that it is correct, otherwise it would be tautology –
Tautology in the sense of analytic and redundant proposition that is always true. Its idea is it
sustention, it sustention is it idea.

11
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 Data validation and scientific assumption of impartiality in accounting by
Horkheimer’s Verstand

It is important, therefore, to bring the theoretical debate on accounting the subjective view
of reality that must be understood by Horkheimer as Vernunft. Through Dialectical Reason,
which recognizes the staging of events and historical factors inherent to them. It is also
necessary to clarify the arrival at the result as a perspective, a random possibility, not as absolute
truth, since the Vernunft states that multiple arrays give rise to accounting numbers. This way
we can question some paradigms, such as the validity and fairness of accounting data, briefly
discussed here.

5. CLOSING COMMENTS

This article aimed to add to critical debate in accounting some Horkheimer’s arguments
that counter the positivist view dominant that accounting is derived from empirical data (so
unquestioned) appearing an objective reality. Positivists reduce the procedures applied science
in physics and its derivations; They deny the name of science to all theoretical efforts that do
not match what they extracted from the physical as legitimate methods. How is it possible to
correctly determine what can be termed science and truth, when this determination presupposes
the methods by which scientific truth is obtained In other words: by refusing to verify its own
principle - according to which any statement that is not verified has sense – guilty of petitio
principi are made: presuppose what must be demonstrated.
We do not intend to propose in this article any ways to change the current paradigm in
accounting. On the contrary, supported in Adorno (2009) displays as negative dialectics, this
article aims solely to foster and mature debate, supported the substantial reason (Vernunft).
There is no pretense of following instrumental idea (Verstand) that the knowledge
generated must be operational and have market value to be exalted (or who is not a suspect or
even useless). Paraphrasing Matos (1989), its critical perspective only recognizes the chaos
behind the apparent order of things, yet not worry about the impossibility of reconciliation. A
negative dialectic does not give the rules; there is no play: “the author as much as he can, put
the cards on the table; which is by no means the same thing as playing”.
On the other hand, we intend to allow the researcher to decide. Discover the foundation
and purpose of their knowledge. Past necessary for an autonomous and truly scientific
knowledge. Only from the construction of this autonomy to the researcher a critical resolution
of the data would be possible. The truth appears with a totally subjugated scientist methodology
is the unquestioned principles translates into belief, false knowledge to be limited, while the
exposed contexts and precariousness of a prospective criticism appears as solid data from the
analysis of contexts. There would therefore be a relative knowledge. As opposed to positivist
objectivity, but the possible knowledge from rich and complex analysis of the phenomenon of
contexts. Soon, it would not be accurate, or relative but contextual historical critical approach
is probabilistically that best suits the connections of the phenomenon
Horkheimer (1972, p. 51) synthesizes this idea about the debate proposed stating that:
for the historical understanding of a given theory we must grasp the interplay of both
aspects, the human and the extrahuman, the individual and the classifiable, the
methodological and the substantive, and not separate any of these, as realities, from
the others. There is no general formula for handling the interaction of the forces which
must be taken into account in particular theories; the formula must be searched out in
each case.

As a limitation, this essay does not intend to deny the positivist perspective and its

12
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 João Gabriel Nascimento de Araújo, Francisco José Sobreira de Matos,
Tiago de Moura Soeiro, Umbelina Cravo Teixeira Lagioia

importance, it is understood that the concept of substantive reason is not against planned
systems, but is an attempt to return to human beings a characteristic of thinking and acting
critically based on substantive criteria, and not just convenience.

As a result, by adding the vernunft perspective in accounting research some interesting

insights and interpretation will be provided from future research. In doing so, we suggest future
research to give special attention to epistemological positions which improve the data validation
by performing new both essay and empirical investigation applying other critical positions and
its rationales.

REFERENCES

Adorno, T. W. (1999). Introdução à controvérsia sobre o positivismo na sociologia alemã. São

Paulo: Nova Cultural.

Adorno, T. W. (2009). Dialética negativa. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar.

Adorno, T. W., & Horkheimer, M. (1985). Dialética do esclarecimento. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge
Zahar.

Andrade, A. P. (2009). Origem e evolução histórica da contabilidade. Em J. F. Ribeiro Filho, J. E.

Lopes, & M. Pederneiras, Estudando Teoria da Contabilidade (pp. 21-42). São Paulo: Atlas.

Baker, C.R.,& Bettner,M.S. (1997). Interpretive and critical research in accounting: A

commentary on its absence from mainstream accounting Research. Critical Perspectives on
Accounting, 8(4), 293–310.

Barra, A. S. (2008). Teoria Crítica e a Crítica ao Positivismo. Revista Fragmentos de Cultura-

Revista Interdisciplinar de Ciências Humanas, 18(3), 447-460.

Bartov, E., Givoly, D., & Hayn, C. (2002). The rewards to meeting or beating earnings
expectations. Journal of accounting and economics , 33(2), 173-204.

Bassani, J. C. (2014). A teoria crítica de Max Horkheimer. Porto Alegre: Dissertação (Mestrado)
– Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul / Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências
Humanas / Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Sociais.

Braga Jr, A. X. (2023). O Debate Metodológico das Ciências Sociais na Teoria Crítica: entre Max
Horkheimer e Jürgen Habermas. Aufklärung: Revista de Filosofia, 10(1).

Chambers, R. J. (1966). Accounting, evaluation and economic behavior . Englewood Cliffs:

Prentice-Hall.

Chauí, M. (2003). Cultura e Democracia (10th ed.). São Paulo: Cortez.

Chua, W.F.(1986). Radical developments in accounting thought. The Accounting Review,61(4),

601–632.

Deegan, C., & Unerman, J. (2011). Financial accounting theory (2nd ed.). London: McGraw-Hill.

13
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 Data validation and scientific assumption of impartiality in accounting by
Horkheimer’s Verstand

Deleuze, G. (1984). Kant‘s Critical Philosophy: The Doctrine of the Faculties. London: The
Athlone Press.

Dyckman, T. R. (1969). Studies in accounting research no. 1: investment analysis and general
price level adjustments. Evanston: American Accounting Association.

Edwards, E. O., & Bell, P. W. (1961). The theory and measurement of business income. Berkeley:
University of California Press.

Ferguson, C., & Wines, G. (1986). Incidence of the use of current cost accounting in published
annual financial statements. Accounting Forum, 9(1), 13-19.

Freitag, B. (1986). A Teoria Crítica: Ontem e Hoje. São Paulo: Editora Brasiliense.

Glautier, M. W., & Underdown, B. (2001). Accounting theory and practice (7th ed.). London:
Prentice Hall.

Gray, R., Owen, D., & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting & accountability: changes and challenges
in corporate social and environmental reporting. London: Prentice Hall.

Gebhardt, E. “A Critique of Methodology: Introduction”. In: Arato, Andrew; Gebhardt, Eike

(eds.). The Essential Frankfurt Reader. New York: Continuum Books, 1993, p. 374-406.

Habermas, J. (1987). Conhecimento e interesse. Rio de Janeiro: Guanabara.

Healy, P. M. (1985). The effect of bonus schemes on accounting decisions. Journal of accounting
and economics, 7(1-3), 85-107.

Hendriksen, E. S., & Van Breda, M. F. (1999). Teoria da contabilidade. São Paulo: Atlas.

Hermann Junior, F. (1996). Contabilidade superior: uma abordagem econômica da

contabilidade. São Paulo: Atlas.

Holthausen, R. W., Larcker, D. F., & Sloan, R. G. (1995). Annual bonus schemes and the
manipulation of earnings. Journal of accounting and economics, 19(1), 29-74.

Horkheimer, M. (1972). Critical theory: selected essays. New York: Continuum.

Horkheimer, M. (1973). Crítica de la razón instrumental (2nd ed.). Buenos Aires: Sur.

Horkheimer, M. (1993). Between philosophy and social science. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Horkheimer, M. (2000). Eclipse da Razão. São Paulo: Centauro.

Horkheimer, M. (2004). Eclipse of Reason. New York: Continuum.

Jones, J. J. (1991). Earnings management during import relief investigations. Journal of

accounting research, 29(2), 193-228.

Kam, V. (1990). Accounting theory (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.

Keung, E., Lin, Z. X., & Shih, M. (2010). Does the stock market see a zero or small positive
earnings surprise as a red flag. Journal of Accounting Research, 48(1), 91-121.

14
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 João Gabriel Nascimento de Araújo, Francisco José Sobreira de Matos,
Tiago de Moura Soeiro, Umbelina Cravo Teixeira Lagioia

Laughlin, R. (1995). Empirical research in accounting: alternative approaches and a case for
“middle-range” thinking. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(1), 63-87.

Lippman, E. J., & Wilson, P. A. (2007). The culpability of accounting in perpetuating the
Holocaust. Accounting History, 12(3), 283-303.

Maali, B., & Jaara, O. (2014). Reality and Accounting: the case for interpretative accounting
research. International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, 4(1), 155.

Marcuse, H. (1989). Razão e revolução. Tradução de Marília Barroso. Rio de Janeiro: Editora
Saga.

Matos, O. (1989). Os Arcanos do Inteiramente Outro: a Escola de Frankfurt, a melancolia e a

Revolução. São Paulo: Brasiliense.

Mattessich, R. (1980). On the evolution of theory construction in accounting: a personal account.

Accounting and Business Research, 10(37A), 158-170.

Mattessich, R. (1995). Conditional-normative accounting methodology: incorporating value

judgments and means-end relations of an applied science. Accounting, Organizations and
Society, 20(4).

Mcnichols, M., & Wilson, G. P. (1998). Evidence of earnings management from the provision for
bad debts. Journal of Accounting Research, 1-31.

Merchant, K. A. (2010). Paradigms in accounting research: A view from North America.

Management Accounting Research, 21(2), 116–120.

Parker, L. D. (2012). Qualitative management accounting research: Assessing deliverables and

relevance. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 23(1), 54–70.

Power, M. (2010). Fair value accounting, financial economics and the transformation of
reliability. Accounting & Business Research, 40(3).

Ryan, B., Scapens, R. W., & Theobald, M. (2002). Research Method and Methodology in Finance
and Accounting (2th ed). Thomson.

Ribeiro Filho, J. F., Lopes, J. E., Feitosa, M. G., & Pederneiras, M. (2009). Base epistemológica
para a teoria da contabilidade. Em J. F. Ribeiro Filho, J. E. Lopes, & M. Pederneiras,
Estudando Teoria da Contabilidade. São Paulo: Atlas.

Ro, B. T. (1980). The adjustment of security returns to the disclosure of replacement cost
accounting information. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 2(2).

Ronen, J. (2008). To fair value or not to fair value: a broader perspective. ABACUS, 44(2).

Schaefer, T. (1984). The accounting information content of current cost income relative to
dividends and historical cost income. Journal of Accounting Research, 22(2).

Schimidt, P., & Santos, J. L. (2008). História da contabilidade: foco na evolução das escolas do
pensamento contábil. São Paulo: Atlas.

15
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023
 Data validation and scientific assumption of impartiality in accounting by
Horkheimer’s Verstand

Scott, W. R. (2011). Financial Accounting Theory. London: Pearson.

Skinner, D. J., & Sloan, R. G. (2002). Earnings surprises, growth expectations, and stock returns
or don’t let an earning torpedo sink your portfolio. Review of Accounting Studies, 7(2-3), 289-
312.

Sutton, T. G. (1988). The proposed introduction of current cost accounting in the UK:
determinants of corporate preference. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 10(2).

Suzuki, T. (2003). The Epistemology of Macroeconomic Reality: The Keynesian Revolution from
an Accounting Point of View. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(5).

Tucker, J. W., & Zarowin, P. A. (2006). Does income smoothing improve earnings
informativeness? The Accounting Review, 81(1), 251-270.

Whittington, G. (2008). The fair value and the IASB/FASB conceptual framework project: an
alternative view. ABACUS, 44(2).

Zeff, S. A. (2007). The SEC rules historical cost accounting: 1934 to the 1970’s. Accounting &
Business Research, 37.

16
Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, ISSN 1984-3704, Salvador, BA, v. 17, p. 1-16, e2313, 2023