Abstract: Elias was confident that,with the development of labor division and human relationship,World War I was indispensable to economic and military integration in a larger region by means of fierce competition, which was the only solution to comprehensive and eternal peace of the human world. However, Ku Hong-ming sarcastically stated that in the course of modernization in the West, moral power entrenched in religion deteriorates, liberalism proliferates, militarism prevails, therefore social order had collapsed; and “mobs” who were shaped by modern educational system and political institution masterminded World War I. From psychological perspective, their diverging elucidations on World War I and its significance were indirectly and directly affected by their differing interpretation of both “evil human nature” rooted in Western culture and sense of insecurity aroused by this belief. Both were self-assured with their doctrine of universalism, for Elias attached importance to economy which propels forward history, but Ku Hong-ming uphold the supremacy of morality which shapes civilization. Both were self-assured with their doctrine of universalism, which yet arised from their utterly different theoretical foundations.