| Accounting knowledge is a theoretical problem. The theories of the knowledge are inventories reasoned by the methods of the thought to know. The accounting knowledge has to appear as a problem requiring all the theories. The accounting sciences recognize it since a time, already: it is always current to elaborate knowledge on the manners to know the accounting. The question of the Technique, more strangely the question of the technique of the accounting control is proposed as Ariadne's thread, as first vigilance in an epistemology of the Science, and here in an epistemology of the science of the accounting, any court, then according to a science of the organizational accounting and the management control. The concepts of the "technique" and the "control" settled to us as the arche and the telos of an approach of constitution of the knowledge to answer more sensibly the frame of a thesis in epistemology of the sciences. The word "technique of accounting control" becomes a episteme, which we shall stop declining in its folds and folds to examine, every time, in diagonal, a problem susceptible to present her it as an object of study. More generally, this generic accounting technique asserts the communication of the differences of the Capital by disjunction which synthesizes, by the unification of its dispersal, by the division of its convergence: it gives to think of the uses and of the metamorphoses of the Capital excentrant infinitely its predicates and by fitting the unity unit of sense of the multiple of all its states which branch out in the same voice, freed from the Me, from the World, from the single tone which makes the clamor of the Being. Because the accounting technique is an ontogeny which will result, late, in the world of the science, because the accounting technique is transductive, that is it is divided into halves by being added, by adding and by happening, finally because the accounting generally double the reality, is coupled and is divided into halves in the individual since thousands of years, we shall remain faithful to this method of dramatization of the Capital in the Being, in its echo in the event of repetition of things and difference of things, and to try hard to us, through the echoes, the occasions and the epistemological variations which we propose, to present an ontology of the accounting as reflexive prerequisite to the scientific approach. We propose thus, in a way, in the report of our results, a theory of the accounting beings which would be of the order of the epoch, which would play the role of remote putting of what makes the scientific thought in, or from, the accounting technological thought ; a theory which would so be of use to operations of liberation, to actions of neutralization of the ideas, concepts and the other loans joining traditions of closed thought, incompossibles worlds some with the others. This thesis is, consequently, an exploratory study which orders precarious fragments of the truths on the knowledge outcomes of a will to know around our object to melt them in three epistemological forms, forms seen as containing an outfit of tools of reflection which we present as series of proposals. The first epistemological domain proposes classic relationships between science and philosophy and a first reflection on the control and the technique in a context of accounting. The second domain treats representations of the technique of accounting control in the history through cases annalistiques structured around big historic periods and uncork in a sociologist and human epistemology of the organizational accounting and some management control. Finally, the third domain is an analysis and a reflection-discussion of our reports to assert an ontology of the business accounting which is confronted to the Capital, defined here as what is the uneven of the Being, where from ensues a series of complementary proposals so that the science is inspired more ontologist epistemology of the accounting multiplicity. Neither Hegelian system, nor ideality Platonist, nor formal condition of the Kantian knowledge, nor pragmatic operating logic, no linearity, unity, identity, but epistemological an ontology of the difference, that of the margin, the borders, the ill-assorted device, the diagonal of the sense on the nonsense, of the base line towards the future, the hidden, the buried, of to fold up to unfold, of the individuation. (Abstract shortened by UMI.). |
