<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/simpledc20021212.xsd">
  <dc:identifier>http://dx.doi.org/10.59704/89c7f9e614f53349</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/reflexive-epistemology-theory-of-knowledge/</dc:identifier>
  <dc:title>Method in the Madness - Pitting Reflexive Inquiry Against General Epistemology</dc:title>
  <dc:creator>Sow, Amadou Korbinian</dc:creator>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:date>2026-02-09</dc:date>
  <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
  <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
  <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>epistemology</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Knowledge Production</dc:subject>
  <dc:publisher>Verfassungsblog</dc:publisher>
  <dc:relation>Verfassungsblog--2366-7044</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>CC BY-SA 4.0</dc:rights>
  <dc:description>In this article, I will critique the project of a general theory of knowledge and scholarly inquiry using the figure of reflexivity. I understand critique here as a procedure that seeks to ceaselessly subdivide its object and thereby complicate it. This specific conception of critique is restless and – crucially – self-reflexive. It must carry on endlessly and thereby be brought to bear against every distinction it has itself drawn. Against a generalised theory of knowledge and scholarly inquiry, I will contrast an historically unsettled concept of epistemology.</dc:description>
</dc>
