杜承陽

編者按：在本刊微信公眾平臺舉辦的“Budding Writers”的多篇來稿中，編輯部精挑細選出10篇上乘佳作，從本年度第二期開始陸續(xù)刊登。奇文共欣賞，疑義相與析。希望能有更多讀者拿起筆，以書寫傳遞心聲，用文字記錄生活。

The disturbing derogation1 of public intellectuals reveals dissatisfaction from the public towards irresponsible intellectuals. Yet， as long as our nation demands development， public intellectuals are indispensable2.

Traditionally， public intellectuals are from the public and into the public. They stand out as the educated， not solely with academic background and professional knowledge， but with public spirit and independent spirit. They sympathize and empathize3 with the public； they pursue democracy and equal rights for the public； they devote heart and soul to the public.

It should be noted， however， that， for public interests， sometimes public intellectuals stand against the public mind. Hanyu， the outstanding scholar in Tang Dynasty， for instance， wrote down the well known article “On Educators” （“Shi Shuo”）， appealing for learning from teachers， setting against shared shame for acknowledging others as ones masters.4

Status quo stands in stark contrast.5 Seemingly， it is the public that harbour6 hostility towards public intellectuals， but that is not an accurate notion. Most people are still in favour of public intellectuals in a traditional sense. In reality， however， a swarm of intellectuals scramble for grandstanding.7 What they present are not thought-provoking considerations， but baffling and unfounded cries.8 Consequently， the purity of public intellectuals has been tainted. And it is no wonder that when expressing views over public affairs on the new media， many public intellectuals have been trapped in a dilemma recently： no matter what they say， they will be accused of “grabbing eyeballs”and “spreading rumours”， or even be denounced as “traitors”.9

That is pathetic10. Yet what accounts for this？

First of all， irresponsible intellectuals have to bear a part of the blame. The key point is that while pleading in the name of people，11 they secure personal gain at the expense of public good. To be specific， some intellectuals， belonging to some special interest groups， make profits through deceiving the public. In addition， numerous intellectuals are puffed with conceit12. Without sufficient knowledge or research， they weigh things on their feelings in lieu of13 facts. As a result， plenty of rumours are produced and spread on the new media. Also， a swathe of them worship and kowtow to everything foreign.14 These intellectuals have lost their national dignity， one of the basic civic15 virtues. That is why they disgust the public.

Meanwhile， some netizens and insufficient censorship cannot escape the blame either.16 A host of netizens are sheer charlatans.17 Whereas the new media is a world where information lacks traditional mechanisms of filter， which makes it so easy to become an “intellectual” or “expert”. With fake educational background and forged18 identity， these liars disguise themselves as intellectuals or experts. Taking advantage of this， they make up stories and sell them to the public. Save charlatans， keyboard warriors make their contributions， too.19 These people taste piquancy in evil-speaking and feel self-exaltation in condemning others.20 Full of narrowmindedness， they morally kidnap and villainize public intellectuals， simply confounding the right with the wrong.21

Then how to take this nasty stigma out of intellectualsreputation？22 For public intellectuals， elites of our nation， it is necessary， albeit arduous and not always rewarding，23 to take social responsibilities according to our tradition. They should not pander to24 the public； rather， they should enlighten them. Moreover， in such a diverse society， when confronting unfair treatment， they need to stay patient， stick to the truth and strive against25 bias. When it comes to the public， they should learn to hold objective perceptions towards achievements and flaws of public intellectuals. After all， public intellectuals are only human. They are not infallible26. More importantly， the public need to elevate27 the ability to identify the truth by themselves， instead of blindly following others. For them， what is needed is to learn to question validity28 of information from any sources， without privileging one over the other. Also， it is necessary for them not to develop uncritical assumptions and actions as they use the new media. Aside from intellectuals and the public， the new media is in need of amelioration29， too. It ought to verify identities of intellectuals and experts.

To conclude， in order to restore public intellectualsuniqueness and purity， all parties are expected to do their bits.

1. derogation： 貶低。

2. indispensable： 必需的，不可或缺的。

3. empathize： 有同感，有共鳴。

4. 比如，唐代杰出學者韓愈曾寫下著名的《師說》，抨擊當時恥學于師的風氣，倡導(dǎo)人們從師學習。set against： 反對。

5. status quo： 現(xiàn)狀；stark：鮮明的。

6. harbor： v. 心懷，懷有。

7. 然而，事實是一群知識分子爭先恐后地嘩眾取寵。a swarm of： 一群；scramble： 爭奪，爭搶；grandstanding： 嘩眾取寵。

8. 他們呈現(xiàn)的不是發(fā)人深省的考量，而是不可理喻、毫無根據(jù)的說法。thought-provoking： 發(fā)人深省的；baffling： 不可理喻的，令人困惑的；unfounded： 無端的，不依據(jù)事實的。

9. dilemma： 兩難境地；denounce：譴責，痛斥。

10. pathetic： 可悲的。

11. plead in the name of people： 打著“為民請命”的旗號。plead意為“請求，申訴”。

12. be puffed with conceit： 自我膨脹的，自負的。

13. in lieu of： 而非。

14. a swathe of： 一大堆；kowtow：極力討好，卑躬屈膝，worship and kowtow to everything foreign意為“崇洋媚外”。

15. civic： 公民的。

16. netizen： 網(wǎng)民；censorship： 審查制度。

17. a host of： 許多，一大群；charlatan：江湖騙子。

18. forged： 偽造的。

19. 除了那些以專家自居的江湖騙子，鍵盤俠們也難辭其咎。keyboard warrior： 鍵盤俠，指在現(xiàn)實生活中膽小怕事，在網(wǎng)上卻占據(jù)道德高點發(fā)表“個人正義感”的人群。

20. 這些人喜歡誹謗他人，通過譴責別人來抬高自己。piquancy： 刺激的趣味；evil-speaking：誹謗，惡語中傷；self-exaltation： 自我欣賞，自鳴得意；condemn： 譴責。

21. 他們思想狹隘，混淆是非，對公共知識分子進行道德綁架和抹黑。kidnap： 綁架；villainize：使成為反派，來自名詞villain（反面人物）；confound...with...： 使……混淆。

22. nasty： 令人不快的；stigma： 污名，烙印。

23. elite： 精英；albeit： 盡管；arduous： 艱巨的，費力的。albeit arduous and not always rewarding指“盡管費力又不一定討好”。

24. pander to： 迎合，取悅。

25. strive against： 對抗。

26. infallible： 完美無缺的。

27. elevate： 提升。

28. validity： 有效性，正確性。

29. amelioration： // 改善。