This paper re-evaluates a persistent but controversial claim in studies of China—to wit, that Chinese thought exhibited a different logical structure than that found in Europe. By situating what is now largely regarded as a Sinological problem within the broader context of the debate between Edward B. Tylor (1832-1917) and Lucien Lévy-Bruhl (1857-1939) about primitive thought, it argues that this line of inquiry about cultural difference, as exemplified by the work of its earliest exponents, Marcel Granet (1884-1940), Joseph Needham (1900-1995), and Angus Charles Graham (1919-1991), is still significant. The significance of these works lies not so much in their specific arguments about China as in the general approach they suggest for explaining cultural difference, an approach that can steer clear of the dangers in evolutionary and essentializing approaches to the study of human mentality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]