Fred Franz and high IQ (page 4)

Earnest

HS,

Like many self-taught scholars, he was quite brilliant in some ways and amazingly stupid in others, because of the very fact that the body of his work was never challenged, let alone monitored.

I assume that you mean Fred Franz's work as a translator was not challenged or monitored within the WTS. I have no knowledge of that. His translation has often been challenged outside the hallowed halls of Brooklyn and there have been numerous discussions in the Watchtower, usually in the form of QFR, which have explained why a verse or verses have been translated in a certain way.

But I came across a most interesting article in The Christian Century (Vol. 68, No.19, pp.587-589) entitled 'How Bible Translators Work - Behind the Scenes in the Preparation of a New Verion of the New Testament'. It says:

A new version of the New Testament in English was published last year by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (Jehovah's Witnesses). This translation...contained a number of variations from the familiar translations of so striking a nature as to arouse the interest of scholars everywhere. It was reviewed for The Christian Century on November 1 [1950] by Steven T. Byington, himself a noted translator. Later, the New World Bible Translation Committee prepared an extended comment on points raised by Mr. Byington in his review, and at the request of The Christian Century Mr. Byington has written a reply to this comment. The exchange between the committee and Mr. Byington gives such an illuminating glimpse into the way in which translators of the Bible work that we are sure it will prove of great interest to the readers of this paper.

And there follows an "illuminating glimpse" into the scholarly considerations in translating the Bible. Byington also reviewed the translation of the OT (which was divided into four sections) for The Christian Century and commented in Vol.72, p.1146 on the second volume (Samuel to Esther) :

Yet continued experience has brought some changes. The translators have begun putting brackets around these words (not numerous) which they acknowledge not to be Hebrew but to be added for the sake of clearness. They have grown more careful to distinguish sentences where in Hebrew the subject comes before the verb from those where the Hebrew verb precedes the subject...though the committee has bound itself to dance in fetters, practice has taught it to dance more freely therein, and this second volume is more readable and vivid than the first.

So it would seem that some of the criticisms were taken on board. Whether they were internal or from correspondence it is difficult to say.

Earnest

hillary_step

Hi Earnest,

Thank you for your interesting post. When I described that lack of criticism of the body of his work, I was not referring to his translating work or the affiliated work that he did in preparing the NWT. These stand as a matter of public record and have been criticized as such. I was referring the huge body of work undertaken to *interpret* the Bible from the 1920's till the 1970's, which have to say the least not endured the test of time, let alone that of scholarly analysis. As you know, the foundations of the WTS rest very heavily on these interpretations even now, and they will spell its need to change or die.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify this point.

Best regards - HS

jst2laws

Hello Undecided,

When I was younger, in the 50s, there was the story going around that he had a photographic memory and could remember all the WTs and could give you the page and paragraph of any quote you could bring up. Just another strange tale of the leaders of the Borg, I'm sure.

I'm not sure what qualifies as a photographic memory, but if I had to define it I would describe F. Franz. More than once he conducted the Bethel family Watchtower Study by memory. I was close enough to see he had minimal if any notes, which were meaningless because he could not see at the time. He knew all the questions as well as the names of the pre-assigned commenter. On one occasion he got confused and started the previous weeks lesson. When corrected he apologized and switched to the current lesson. As Faraon says, however, "memory is by no means a sign of intelligence".

I am not sharing this as an FF defender but only as my experience. I personally feel it is a shame these wonderful abilities are so often found in morons. As in the movie Amadaes, I feel Soliari's (spelling) frustration that musical genius was wasted on Beethoven, while rest of us, regardless of our passion, must be content with mediocrity.

Jst2

SPAZnik

You mean like Rainman and the Telephone Directory? Kewl!!!

SPAZ

Reborn2002

You mean like Rainman and the Telephone Directory? Kewl!!!
SPAZ

HAHAHAHAHA!

While extremely humorous, I believe SPAZnik's comment proves a point. Even if Fred Franz did possess a photographic memory and the ability to memorize words, that does not necessarily constitute intelligence.

Many people who are autistic and by all terms "idiot savants" are capable of such things or small feats such as playing Beethoven from memory.

Regarding his capacity to rise to the executive level of a corporation, that is not necessarily tantamount to intelligence either. Judging by some of the companies I have worked for which lost money, in many cases it is due to family relations (son of the President gets a VP or CEO position), or simply being in the right place at the right time.

As has been previously stated in this thread, Franz claimed to be a representative for God. This was his lifelong work. How well did he accomplish this work? What kind of legacy did this "scholar" leave behind? Even if he did not himself write all of the Watchtower's doctrines, he was present and therefore condoned them. What teachings did these include? Doctrines which kill people needlessly (organ transplants and blood doctrine), chauvinistic beliefs (women's sexual appetites are comparable to cows) and the list goes on and on.

You ask if Fred Franz was intelligent? I say no more so than any average Joe on the street. He simply was put in the right place at the right time to be worshiped by naive people who believed the religious propaganda he helped distribute to them.

Just my 2 cents.

petespal2002

After reading these replies with interest I begin to wonder a little if some of the comments are based less on fact and more on personal feeling, which indeed runs high where FW is involved? As the titular head of a worldwide organization for so long, I feel he must have had some qualities worth respecting, at least his positive attitude towards his blindness, which would make many bitter. I loved the comments about people with higher than average intelligence being next to useless in real life. I've always felt the higher the IQ the lower the common sense. I am interested in what you all feel were his worst 'crimes', and have started a thread to that end.

larc

As Waiting pointed out FF had several skills, not just a very good memory. Thus, would have to have been highly intelligent.

Regarding common sense. No, a high IQ does not garantee common sense. However, stupidity does garantee a lack of common sense.

Amazing

Hi Larc:

Give one specific example, a case study, where a growing organization was run by someone of low intelligence.

Enron. , well, they screwed things up pretty good, in a "low intelligent" manner - or shall we say,"brain-dead idiots." A better example is that of Portland General Electric (PGE) whose president bankrupted other companies before being hired to run PGE. Both he and the dopes who hired him ruined PGE, a good company once run by engineers, then they sold it to Enron. And now you know the rest of the story. - Jim W.

Farkel

: No, a high IQ does not garantee common sense. However, stupidity does garantee a lack of common sense.

Nor daz a Phd guarantee gud spellung!

Farkel

ashitaka

Fark-LOL

Fred Franz and high IQ

Share this