JOINING THE DISPUTATION: Taking Graham Seriously on Taking Chinese Thought Seriously

"…the understanding of Chinese philosophy depends …on philosophizing for oneself. Taking Chinese thought seriously is not simply a matter of acknowledging the rationality of some of it (and perhaps denying the name 'philosophy' to the rest), nor of discovering something valuable to oneself in the poetry of Lao-tzu ^a or the diagrams of the Yi. ^b Its study constantly involves one in important contemporary issues in moral philosophy, the philosophy and history of science, the deconstruction of established conceptual schemes, the problem of relating thought to linguistic structure, and correlative thinking to logic."¹
"To approach Chinese philosophy trusting to the dictionary and one's instinct for the language is to fail to take it altogether seriously, and the practice has been a perpetual drag on progress in discovering how much or how little that we call philosophyizing is actually there."²     

THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MEASURE OF PERCEIVED HOMOPHILY IN INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION

This paper reports the development of a measure of perceived homophily. In both an initial investigation and in four subsequent studies employing samples from diverse populations, four dimensions of response were observed. These dimensions were labeled Attitude, Morality, Appearance, and Background. Additional results indicated that opinion leaders are perceived as more homophilous than non-opinion leaders on the dimensions of Attitude, Morality, and Background. The scales found to measure these dimensions are suggested for consideration by researchers concerned with homophily or interpersonal similarity in human communication.