Western Europe and America have a practically homogeneous mental life, which I should trace to three sources:  (1) Greek culture; (2) Jewish religion and ethics; (3) modern industrialism, which itself is an outcome of modern science.  We may take Plato, the Old Testament, and Galileo as representing these three elements, which have remained singularly separable down to the present day.  From the Greeks we derive literature and the arts, philosophy and pure mathematics; also the more urbane portions of our social outlook.  From the Jews we derive fanatical belief, which its friends call “faith”; moral fervour, with the conception of sin; religious intolerance, and some part of our nationalism.  From science, as applied in industrialism, we derive power and the sense of power, the belief that we are as gods, and may justly be, the arbiters of life and death for unscientific races.  We derive also the empirical method, by which almost all real knowledge has been acquired.  These three elements, I think, account for most of our mentality.

No one of these three elements has had any appreciable part in the development of China, except that Greece indirectly influenced Chinese painting, sculpture, and music.[93] China belongs, in the dawn of its history, to the great river empires, of which Egypt and Babylonia contributed to our origins, by the influence which they had upon the Greeks and Jews.  Just as these civilizations were rendered possible by the rich alluvial soil of the Nile, the Euphrates, and the Tigris, so the original civilization of China was rendered possible by the Yellow River.  Even in the time of Confucius, the Chinese Empire did not stretch far either to south or north of the Yellow River.  But in spite of this similarity in physical and economic circumstances, there was very little in common between the mental outlook of the Chinese and that of the Egyptians and Babylonians.  Lao-Tze[94] and Confucius, who both belong to the sixth century B.C., have already the characteristics which we should regard as distinctive of the modern Chinese.  People who attribute everything to economic causes would be hard put to it to account for the differences between the ancient Chinese and the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians.  For my part, I have no alternative theory to offer.  I do not think science can, at present, account wholly for national character.  Climate and economic circumstances account for part, but not the whole.  Probably a great deal depends upon the character of dominant individuals who happen to emerge at a formative period, such as Moses, Mahomet, and Confucius.