Relationship Between Positive Accounting Theory and Normative Accounting Theory Before we discuss the relationship between accounting theory and the Positive and Normative Accounting Theory, it is better if we try to distinguish the basic objectives of these two accounting theory. According to Suwardjono (2002), The different of Positive Accounting Theory and Accounting Normative is as follows. Positive difference Normative Is the form of statement should Descriptive Questions tone perspective Facts problem area Valuesm / Idealism Base inference Objective / subjective empirical Criteria for acceptance of the theory True / false Good / bad Science Art Testing Method From the table above we can see that the objectives of: 1. Positive Accounting Theory is the explanation or reasoning to show scientifically the truth of a statement or accounting phenomena as it is appropriate facts. Facts as targets. according to Friedman (1953), the `essentially free from the bonds of various aspects of ethics, as presented Keynes. He was more referring to the term "as is" (what it is) than to the term "should be so" (it should be). It aims to explain the theory predicts, and gives answers to the practice of accounting. In addition, this theory also predicts a variety of accounting phenomena and describing how the interaction between the accounting variables in the real world. Validity of positive accounting theory is assessed on the basis of conformity with the facts or theory of what in fact happened (what it is). 2. Normative Accounting Theory is the explanation or reasoning to justify the feasibility of a most appropriate accounting treatment with the intended purpose. More explaining accounting practices that should be applied, it should be. Value as a target. Examples of application of concrete application of positive accounting theory by using Hegel Dialectic approach can be seen when we question what factors influence the level of voluntary disclosure. The answer to that question based on objective facts and based on empirical evidence. While the example application of Normative Accounting Theory is when we want to know when sewaguna be capitalized. Of course these questions generate various alternative answers. Using Normative accounting theory we will choose the most appropriate "should", using logical reasoning. In Indonesia Normative Accounting Theory Practice known as the General Accounting grateful (PABU) or GAAP. One small part of the SAK PABU or financial accounting standards. SAK existing issued by IAI through an organ which we are familiar with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (DSAK). This Council in charge of drafting the financial accounting standards that will apply. First draft was discussed with the Consultative Council of Financial Accounting Standards (DKSAK) and then issued its draft. When the input has been obtained, the socialization of (public hearing) to get more input from the public (users of financial statements). Furthermore, if there is no problem anymore, then IAI will endorse these standards and effectively enforced. Of two real examples above can be seen the relationship between Positive Accounting Theory and Theory of Normative Accounting; 1. Differences between the approaches and basic accounting theory caused two accounting taxonomies. Positive Accounting Theory approach produces accounting as a science of taxonomy. While Normative Accounting Theory approach produces accounting taxonomies as art. That they are the same as the approach is recognized as a means of accounting theory. 2. Normative Accounting Theory Accounting Practices shaped thank General (PABU) is a theory of reference in providing the best way to predict various phenomena accounting and describes how the interaction between accounting variables in the real world functions meruipakan Positive
Accounting Theory approach. Not ruled out, the facts in the real world (accounting practices) would influence the Normative Accounting Theory. In accordance with this relationship to understand Hegel's Dialectic. Where antitasi and thesis will produce synthesis. And synthesis will result in antithesis. And so on.
References Gilles. (2006). Philosophy of Hegel. Jakarta: Icon Tan Malaka. (2008). Madilog Materialism, Dialectics, Logika.Jakarta: LPPM 2008 edition of the journal Mahardika www.tazkiyah.blogspot.com www.universitasgunadarma.ac.id