In Gessen’s “The Dying Russians” two methods for uncovering the truth have been shown. One, by Michelle Parsons, attempts to uncover why Russians are dying so young by focusing on one turning point. The other, by Eberstadt, attempts to do the same by analyzing many smaller factors. Despite their different perspectives, neither manages to determine what is actually causing the poor demographic situation in Russia. The former is a cut-and-dry case as it only points to one change, the fall of communism, to explain the situation in Russia. This falls under the definition of a “hedgehog” according to Berlin. However, Eberstadt is not so clear. While at first glance his argument appears to be that of a fox—analyzing many different elements—they are all of the same scientific nature. In my opinion, this defeats the purpose of a foxy argument (to cover all potential angles). Therefore, neither Eberstadt nor Parsons seem to analyze the situation effectively. Instead of treating cultural, institutional, and historical elements as being interconnected, as they should, they analyze them in independent vacuums. Treating these factors as parts of a whole would put us on the path towards finding the truth behind Russia’s “crisis.” In the end, we can’t find an overall truth. However, we can still find many other smaller truths that lead up to it. By putting these smaller truths together (for example, by acknowledging that both Eberstadt and Parsons’ arguments have elements of truth to them), we can get closer and closer to this greater truth. Although we can never fully grasp what this fully means (like infinity to mathematicians), it does not mean that it is not worth striving for. If it isn’t worth striving for, then we may as well give up on everything now, because by that logic anything less than perfection is worth nothing at all.