From what I understand about gramsci’s writings from the prison notebooks is that he believed that intellectuals (as in just extremely smart people in general) were not their own special group of people in society. More specifically, Gramsci believed that every group in a society that had practical use for the advancement of said society had their own demographic of intellectuals, or, people who could take whatever field they were in an improve its station. (Correct me if I’m wrong.) Gramsci also introduces hegemony as a potential problem, that is the domination of traditionally made intellectuals that further the agenda of whatever specific social group is in charge. Gramsci also believed that, simply being a smart individual was not enough to justify being called an intellectual. He believed the intellectuals were essentially the go-getters, the ones who could take charge and create opportunities for their social sphere to thrive, in spite of the challenge of hegemony. He uses the example of entrepreneurs, “at least the elite amongst them must have the capacity to be an organizer of society in general, including all its complex organism of services…because of the need to create the conditions most favorable to the extension of their own class.” The entrepreneur must create positions for those around him to help improve his current position, as well as find opportunities to do so. (Norton pg 1002) Even with such qualifications, Gramsci argues that another factor that determines whether or not the term intellectual is appropriate is to look at their place “within the general complex of social relations.” (Norton 1004) Going back to the entrepreneur, Gramsci believes it’s not enough for him to possess the qualities of an intellectual, and successfully improve his demographics’ standings if it does not somehow effect or improve “general social relations which specifically characterize [his] position within history” (1004) “All men are intellectuals, but not all men have in society the function of intellectuals.”