Reflexivity is the 'conscious, willed, purposive, flexible, concentrated, and social facets which enable man to pursue the unique demands of his species.' (Ollman, 1976). The application of reflexivity in criminology involves the conscious application of ethical principles in theory development. Traditional criminologists dissociate themselves from the ethical implications of their work by ignoring the philosophical or background assumptions of their theories and by claiming that their use of scientific methodology insulates them from ethical postures. Any criminology or social science that professes to be 'critical' must be reflexive about its own interests and value commitments and aware of its grounding in ideology. Marx argued that the separation of facts from values in social research is symptomatic of man's alienation in society. Based on this perspective, 'critical' or 'radical' criminologists consciously develop criminological theory out of value-laden interpretations of socioeconomic and political structures and interactions as they relate to criminal behavior; however, radical criminologists, who base their theories on a critical evaluation of capitalist society, often are not critical of their own position. Problems inherent in the radical criminological position are (1) how a person becomes conscious of both his own and another's 'class interests,' (2) how a person realizes his class interests once he has become conscious of them, (3) whether the changes which occur in human behavior are in keeping with new interests created, (4) how long it takes for new conditions to produce new behavior, and (5) why socialism is not the panacea for the iniquities of capitalism in general and crime in particular. Two notes and 44 references are provided.