Does adherence to the principles of logic commit us to a particular way of viewing the world? Or are there ways of being – ways of behaving in the world, including ways of thinking, feeling, and speaking – that ground the normative constraints that logic imposes? Does the fact that assertions, the traditional elements of logic, are typically made about beings present a problem for metaphysical (or post-metaphysical) prospects of making assertions meaningfully about being? Does thinking about being (as opposed to beings) accordingly require revising or restricting logic's reach – and, if so, how is this possible? Or is there something precious about the very idea of thinking the limits of thinking? Contemporary scholars have become increasing sensitive to how Heidegger, much like Wittgenstein, instructively poses such questions. Heidegger on Logic is a collection of new essays by leading scholars who critically ponder the efficacy of his responses to them.

Who would want to murder the world's most famous philosopher? ​Turns out: nearly everyone.​In 1649, Descartes was invited by the Queen of Sweden to become her Court Philosopher. Though he was the world's leading philosopher, his life had by this point fallen apart. He was 53, penniless, living in exile in Amsterdam, alone. With much trepidation but not much choice, he arrived in Stockholm in mid-October.​Shortly thereafter he was dead.​Pneumonia, they said. But who could believe that? There were just too many persons of interest who wanted to see Descartes dead, and for too many reasons. That so many of these persons were in Stockholm--thanks to the Gala the Queen was throwing to celebrate the end of the terrible Thirty Years' War--made the official story all the less plausible. Death by poisoning was the unofficial word on the cobblestone.​Enter Adrien Baillet. A likeable misfit with a mysterious backstory, he arrives just as the French Ambassador desperately needs an impartial Frenchman to prove that Descartes died of natural causes--lest the "murder" in Lutheran Sweden of France's great Catholic philosopher trigger colicky French boy-King Louis XIV to reignite that awful War. Baillet hesitatingly agrees to investigate Descartes's death, knowing that if--or when--he screws up, he could be personally responsible for the War's Thirty-First Year. ​But solving the mystery of Descartes's death (Baillet soon learns) requires first solving the mystery of Descartes's life, with all its dangerous secrets ... None of it is easy, as nearly everyone is a suspect and no one can be trusted. Nor does it help that he must do it all under the menacing gaze of Carolus Zolindius, the terrifying Swedish Chancellor with the strangely intimidating limp.​But Baillet somehow perseveres, surprising everyone as he figures it all out--all the way to the explosive end.

Russia, once compared to a giant sphinx, is often considered in the Anglophone world an alien culture, often threatening and always enigmatic. Although recognizably European, Russian culture also has mystical features, including the idiosyncratic phenomenon of Russian irrationalism. Historically, Russian irrationalism has been viewed with caution in the West, where it is often seen as antagonistic to, and subversive of, the rational foundations of Western speculative philosophy. Some of the remarkable achievements of the Russian irrationalist approach, however, especially in the artistic sphere, have been recognized and even admired, though not sufficiently investigated. Bridging the gap between intellectual cultures, Olga Tabachnikova discusses such fundamental irrationalist themes as language and the linguistic underpinning of culture; the power of illusion in national consciousness; the changing relationship between love and morality; the cultural roots of humour, as well as the relevance of various individual writers and philosophers from Pushkin to Brodsky to the construction of Russian irrationalism.

Populism has taken the world by storm—but what is it? In this volume, twelve political scientists and political theorists approach this question from a variety of new perspectives, empirical and theoretic, covering populism around the world. In addition to chapters on populism in Eastern Europe and Britain, six authors analyse populism in the United States, treating it, variously, as a reaction against technocracy, a form of technocracy, a manifestation of regional and class norms, a violent ideological import, and (potentially) a progressive democratic phenomenon. All the contributors attempt to understand populists on their own terms rather than reducing populism to a psychological or structural phenomenon. This book was originally published as a special issue of the journal Critical Review.

Written in political exile during the Second World War and first published in 1945, Karl Popper's The Open Society and Its Enemies is one of the most influential books of the twentieth century. Hailed by Bertrand Russell as a 'vigorous and profound defence of democracy', its now legendary attack on the philosophies of Plato, Hegel and Marx exposed the dangers inherent in centrally planned political systems. Popper's highly accessible style, his erudite and lucid explanations of the thought of great philosophers and the recent resurgence of totalitarian regimes around the world are just three of the reasons for the enduring popularity of The Open Society and Its Enemies, and for why it demands to be read both today and in years to come. This is the second of two volumes of The Open Society and Its Enemies.