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 American. But they have done more than that. They have grown dissatisfied with the role of intellectual. It is they, not American, who have become anti-intellectual.
First, the object of our study pleads for definition. What is an intellectual? (46) I shall define him as an intellectual who has elected as his primary duty and pleasure in life the activity of thinking in a 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. (47) 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 this decision.
This definition excludes many individuals usually referred to as intellectuals—the average scientist for one. (48) 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. (49) 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. (50) 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 deion even fits the majority eminent scholars. “Being learned in some branch of human knowledge is one thing, living in public and industrious thoughts,” as Emerson would say, “is something else.”
46：I shall define him as an intellectual who has elected as his primary duty and pleasure in life the activity of thinking in a Socratic way about moral problems.
很明显，本题是以定语从句作为分水岭的，我们由此将句子分成两部分：即主句和定语从句。前一部分中，有以下得分点值得关注：首先，我们应该可以把握“define…as”（把……定义为……）这个词组。然后，我们需要对 “him”做一些处理。这里的“him”我们既可以翻译成为“知识分子”，也可以省略不译。也就是说，前句我们可以翻译成：“我会把‘知识分子’定义为这样的人，他们……”或者是“我对于‘知识分子’的定义是……的人”。再次，本句中出现的“intellectual”（知识分子）是一个高频词汇，曾经在历年的考研试卷中出现过至少20次。在2003年的62题中，“intellectual enquiry”翻译为“知识探究”，可见，“intellectual”本身是一个一词多义的高频词，我们考生在平时的复习过程中需要给予这样的小词以足够的关注。
后一部分，是由who引导的定语从句。在这个从句中，我们首先注意到一个词组“elect…as”（把……作为）。进而我们不难发现，这里由于句子本身的宾语比较长，因此宾语补足语被前置了。即本来是elect A as B这样一个结构，但由于A太长，最终变成了elect as B A这样一个结构，即elected as his primary duty and pleasure in life(B) the activity of thinking in a Socratic way about moral problems(A).从语法角度讲，这就是把S＋V＋O＋C 主谓宾补结构（S＝主语；V＝谓语；O＝宾语；C＝宾补）中的C前置成为S＋V＋C＋O。同样的结构，以往也曾考过，比如2003年第65题，本来是make something possible，但由于something以及它的修饰成分太长，结果变成了make possible something (which makes possible immense amounts of concrete research and understanding)。同样是possible作为句子的宾补，如果something是短宾语，那么适用make something possible的结构，而如果something是长宾语，那么就适用make possible something的结构。
47：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 this decision.