Abstract In general, we must conclude that Dr. Marple simply has not demonstrated his case. His arguments either do not apply very well to any type of current value approach, or apply to only a few of them, or apply with equal force to the historical-cost accounting that he wishes to defend. There may well be grave objections to the use of current values in financial reports, but if so, they are unlikely to be uncovered without going to the considerable trouble of determining the fundamental assumptions, postulates, purposes, standards, and ways of looking at things that underlie historical-cost accounting, on the one hand, and the various current value approaches, on the other. It is this very difficult task which accountants must eventually perform. To perform it, to move beyond superficial discussion of the complex issues involved, accountants are going to need all the help that logical analysis can provide. To belittle this tool, as Dr. Marple does, is to hinder and belittle the eventual development of a reasoned accounting theory and a fully responsible accounting practice.
Angela Thomas (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: