How do you teach children arithmetic? By counting beads and playing with rods or by teaching them multiplication tables? People in different cultures are taught to think differently.

Europe is divided between the pragmatic, empirical, inductive thinking of Anglo-Saxon and North Sea cultures and the rationalist, deductive thinking of the rest of the continent. Anglo-Saxons are uncomfortable with theories and generalisations and concepts. They prefer to deal with data. Other Europeans are uncomfortable with dealing with data unless it is on the context of an idea or a system. The difference is reflected in the history of European philosophy and in the way our children are taught in schools, in the way football teams are managed and how we structure memos, reports and presentations.

What they have in common is that they are linear modes of thinking. They are based on logical reasoning, categorisation and a belief in cause and effect. Other ways of thinking - intuition, emotional intelligence, lateral thinking, free association and flashes of insight from nowhere – are mistrusted unless they can be logically substantiated.

Within these broad categories of thinking different cultures may use different intellectual tools to arrive at a conclusion. They can be misunderstood or misinterpreted as socially inappropriate. The Socratic irony often encountered in Hispanic culture, in which humility or pretended ignorance is a device for questioning, can seem like stupidity to others. Germanic scepticism in which arguments are habitually doubted can seem aggressive and rude to those who associate ideas with the people who voice them. Dialectic taught to French people from an early age, in which a thesis is instinctively countered by antithesis to arrive eventually at a synthesis, can seem like deliberate obstructiveness. Middle Eastern discursiveness that explores every aspect of a proposition from all possible angles can seem like obfuscation.

The most striking difference is between Asian and Western ways of thinking. While western thinking strives for order, Asian thinking aspires to harmony. Rather than look for ways of reducing facts or premises into categories, eliminating what does not logically fit, it looks for ways of associating them into meaningful patterns which accommodate rather than resolve conflicting premises or facts. Associative thinking is a holistic process that looks for relationships even though no causal link is apparent. Associative thinking makes connections rather than choices and has a greater tolerance of ambiguity and contradiction than Westerners are used to. A good example is the difference between Chinese medicine - holistic and symptom based, and western medicine – reductionist and analytic.

In cross-cultural encounters with Asians, Westerners should not expect the cut and thrust of argument, the search for simple solutions to problems and resolutions of conflict. Direct questions may be out of place and the eliciting of alternatives or preferences may meet with diffidence. Equally, Asians should not expect from Westerners intellectual subtlety, an ability to deal with complexity, or understanding of a wider picture. 

Whenever people of different cultures work together there is a possibility that different ways of thinking create barriers to understanding and communication. A European child brought up by Asians will think like an Asian, an Asian child brought up by Europeans will think like a European. What is culturally determined is how we are trained to process, rationalise, justify and communicate our ideas.