This final chapter is devoted entirely to the question of the universality of logic. Are logical laws completely independent of cultural determinations, as Russell and Frege claimed? The studies presented in the previous chapters leave the question open. Wiener, Nicod, and Feng are universalists; they reject any pluralization of logic. However, in the case of the first two (at least), the adaptations brought about by philosophical background profoundly modify Russell’s logical methods. There are therefore feedback effects from cultural contexts on the analytical framework, which could suggest that universalism is not tenable. We show, however, that this conclusion is too hasty: universalism, properly understood, is perfectly capable of accommodating these feedbacks from culture to logic.