Abstract
This article aims to critically examine three approaches to reflexiv- ity in philosophical texts, specifically the case when the textuality becomes its own topic. The first approach is when there is no re- flexivity at all.
It is just describing how - according to the author - things are. As an example of this approach I take German media philosophy.
This tradition is specific because reflexivity is supposed to be its very topic. However, the media philosophers succeeded in touching the indefinability of mediality itself.
Another method is to question one's own and possibly also the reader's position. I have chosen Annemarie Mol's empirical philosophy as the example here.
The problem is that despite following the "ontological turn", the author remains (probably inevitably) also to a large extent trapped in the fact that he/she describes the world, that is, in sub- ject/object dichotomy and therefore, in epistemology. The third way to write aims to make readers feel what the author tells.
My example here is the varied work of Walter Benjamin whom I for the purpose of this article consider more as a prophet rather than the precise thinker who he (also) by all means was. While using the second approach myself, I discuss advantages and challenges of the three and find their points of touch.