My two cents: the english way of doing a presentation sacrifices similarities at the benefit of recognising differences.
but that is most likely to be result from either the characteristics of the english language, or - and this may be an example of where when you only have a hammer every thing looks like a nail - because england is an island, and therefore there is no need to search for a national identify (already given by physical geography).

Emmanuel Todd explanation: the positions occupied by brothers in the english family (and in most netherlands, and danemark, and brittany) are not predefined as equal - namely in terms of heritage rights - and that affects how people define themselves (and identification really means belonging to a group, however small, since is common labelling).

.
.
.
(i had already written what follows. it is not very relevant, but it has some merit. so, instead of erasing it, i put it away from the main message of the post)

A key element is the fact they brain evolved to recognise correlations, or principal components: the independent variables which determine the greatest variation of outcome in the observed phenomenon (and therefore outcome can be defined as a function of those variables).
identifying the orientation - greater X leads to greater f(X), or the opposite - can be  on a second layer of data processing, and is much simple. After all - lets put it in geometrical terms -, there are many possible directions, but only two orientations.
Therefore most of brain activity in this process can still be used to support the opposite conclusion.

I'm afraid that ET's narrative is pitting against a cultural mindset dominant at the top of the economic food-chain. (Which is why I dig Chris Cook's analogy of the modern mammals superseding the dinosaurs.)