Is it true that the American intellectual is rejected and considered of no account in his society? I am going to suggest that it is not true. Father Bruckbergen told part of the story when he observed that it is the intellectuals who have rejected Americans. But they have done more than that. They have grown dissatisfied with the role of intellectual. It is they, not Americans, who have become anti-intellectual.
First, the object of our study pleads for definition. What is an intellectual? I shall define him as an individual who has elected as his primary duty and pleasure in life the activity of thinking in Socratic(苏格拉底) way about moral problems. He explores such problems consciously, articulately, and frankly, first by asking factual questions, then by asking moral questions, finally by suggesting action which seems appropriate in the light of the factual and moral information which he has obtained. His function is analogous to that of a judge, who must accept the obligation of revealing in as obvious a matter as possible the course of reasoning which led him to his decision.
This definition excludes many individuals usually referred to as intellectuals―the average scientist for one. I have excluded him because, while his accomplishments may contribute to the solution of moral problems, he has not been charged with the task of approaching any but the factual aspects of those problems. Like other human beings, he encounters moral issues even in everyday performance of his routine duties―he is not supposed to cook his experiments, manufacture evidence, or doctor his reports. But his primary task is not to think about the moral code, which governs his activity, any more than a businessman is expected to dedicate his energies to an exploration of rules of conduct in business. During most of his walking life he will take his code for granted, as the businessman takes his ethics.
The definition also excludes the majority of factors, despite the fact that teaching has traditionally been the method whereby many intellectuals earn their living. They may teach very well, and more than earn their salaries, but most of them make little or no independent reflections on human problems which involve moral judgment. This description even fits the majority eminent scholars. “Being learned in some branch of human knowledge is one thing, living in public and industrious thoughts”, as Emersion would say, “is something else.”
【答案及分析】
1. 原文：I shall define him as an individual who has elected as his primary duty and pleasure in life the activity of thinking in Socratic(苏格拉底) way about moral problems.
分析：elected as his primary duty and pleasure in life the activity of thinking in Socratic way about moral problems中存在语序倒装现象，正常语序是elected the activity of thinking in Socratic way about moral problems as his primary duty and pleasure in life，其中的基本结构为elected…as…，意思是“选择……作为……”。
参考译文：我所说的知识分子指“把运用苏格拉底方式思考道德问题作为自己人生主要职责和乐趣的个人”。
2. 原文：His function is analogous to that of a judge, who must accept the obligation of revealing in as obvious a manner as possible the course of reasoning which led him to his decision.
分析：短语is analogous to的意思是“类似于”。同样地，revealing in as obvious a manner as possible the course of reasoning which led him to his decision也存在倒装结构，正常语序是revealing the course of reasoning which led him to his decision in as obvious a manner as possible。
参考译文：知识分子的职责类似于法官，其必须承担的义务是以尽可能明白的方式说明作出决策的思维过程。
3. 原文：I have excluded him because, while his accomplishments may contribute to the solution of moral problems, he has not been charged with the task of approaching any but the factual aspects of those problems.
分析：be charged with意思是“委以（重任）”；approach作动词用，这里的意思是“处理，考虑”；but作介词用，意思是“除……以外”。
参考译文：我把普通科学工作者排除在外，理由是，尽管普通科学工作者的成就也许有助于道德问题的解决，但他们承担的任务只不过是研究这些问题的事实层面。
4. 原文：But his primary task is not to think about the moral code, which governs his activity, any more than a businessman is expected to dedicate his energies to an exploration of rules of conduct in business.
分析：本句的句型是not…any more than…，表示同等程度的比较，意思是“如同……一样”。
参考译文：但是，普通科学工作者的主要任务不是思考支配其行为的道德规范，正如不能指望商人把整个精力用于探索商业行为规范一样。
5. 原文：They may teach very well, and more than earn their salaries, but most of them make little or no independent reflections on human problems which involve moral judgment.
分析：and more than earn their salaries与very well形成并列关系，都是用来修饰teach的，其中more than比较结构中还包含有省略结构, 主句如果补全，应该是：and they may teach more than earn their salaries；短语reflections on的意思是“对……进行反思”。
参考译文：他们在传道授业方面也许做得很好，而且不仅仅是为了挣钱。但绝大多数知识分子对于涉及道德判断的人类问题很少或没有进行独立反思。
在美国社会，知识分子受到排斥，被认为无足轻重，果真如此吗？我要证明这不是真的。布鲁克伯庚神父说，是知识分子抛弃了美国，他只道出了部分真相。但知识分子所做的不限于此。他们对知识分子所扮演的角色越来越不满。反知识分子的是知识分子自己，而不是美国人。
首先需要对本研究的对象进行界定。知识分子是什么？我对知识分子的定义是：“选择把运用苏格拉底方式思考道德问题作为自己人生主要职责和乐趣的个人。”知识分子有意识地对这些问题进行探讨，明确而坦率地提出自己的观点。他们先提出事实性的问题，然而提出道德问题，最后根据所掌握的事实和道德情况提出合适的行动建议。其职能类似于法官，必须以尽可能明了的方式说明作出决策的思考过程。
该定义排除了许多通常被称为“知识分子” 的个人，如普通的科学工作者。我把他们排除在外，理由是尽管他们的成就也许有助于道德问题的解决，但其承担的任务只不过是研究这些问题的事实层面。他们与其他人一样，甚至在履行自己日常职责的工作中，会遇到各种道德问题，如按理不得伪造实验、杜撰证据、篡改报告。但是，普通科学工作者的主要任务不是思考指导其行为的道德规范，正如不能指望商人把整个精力用于探索商业行为规范一样。就如商人看待商业道德一样，普通科学工作者在有生之年会把遵守行为规范视为理所当然的事情。
从事教育是许多知识分子赖以生存的传统手段。尽管如此，该定义还是把绝大多数因素排除在外。知识分子在传道授业方面也许做得很好，而且不仅仅是为了挣钱。但绝大多数知识分子对于涉及道德判断的人的问题很少或没有进行独立反思。这点甚至适用于大多数著名学者。正如爱默生所说的，“在人类知识的某一领域有学问是一回事，而活跃在公共、勤勉的思想之中则是另外一回事。”