IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijecac/v9y2020i4p294-314.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Audit professional scepticism and the classics: does pyrrhonism serve the practitioner?

Author

Listed:
  • Karen A. Van Peursem

Abstract

This analysis draws on an ancient philosophy to offer how audit regulatory discourse and judicial interpretation come to represent, or fail to represent, the mindset of the philosophical skeptic. Ancient teachings of Pyrrho of Elis, Sextus Empiricus and their modernist peers are brought to bear on concepts formed around what it means to be a 'skeptic'. International auditing standards, ethical codes, personal interviews and a lengthy New Zealand legal judgement reveal professional understandings. Professional discourses are found to be a reductionist form of the skeptical mindset whereby philosophical intent gives way to narrowly-defined and risk-directed interpretations. There is an economy to the professional-sceptic recognising an end-point to enquiry and a less reflexive form of critique. Conclusions reached thus question the authenticity and depth of professional interpretations. Implications for practice offer that a greater commitment to a free-form improvisational enquiry with less dogma-inspiring structures would more closely represent the sceptical pursuit.

Suggested Citation

  • Karen A. Van Peursem, 2020. "Audit professional scepticism and the classics: does pyrrhonism serve the practitioner?," International Journal of Economics and Accounting, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(4), pages 294-314.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijecac:v:9:y:2020:i:4:p:294-314
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=110165
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijecac:v:9:y:2020:i:4:p:294-314. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=357 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.