One of the most common rhetorical moves of our age is to point out how many top scientists supposedly believe in various forms of spiritual mysticism, cosmic consciousness, or fashionable “esoteric” nonsense. The implication is always the same: these people are extraordinarily intelligent, therefore their beliefs must carry some special credibility.
At a very superficial level, the argument seems plausible. If a Nobel laureate talks about hidden dimensions of consciousness or mystical unity with the universe, surely that means there must be something to it. Intelligence is being smuggled in as a kind of epistemic certificate.
But if that logic were sound, one would expect a simple empirical relationship: the higher a person’s IQ, the stronger their belief in the supernatural. Fortunately, this is not a matter of speculation. It has been studied extensively. Over the past fifty years, hundreds of studies—using different samples and different methods—have reached a remarkably consistent conclusion: higher IQ is associated with lower, not higher, belief in supernatural claims.
So how do we explain the apparent paradox of brilliant scientists drifting into cosmic mysticism?
The answer is straightforward once we stop confusing intelligence with creativity.
The very best scientists are not distinguished primarily by raw analytical horsepower. They are distinguished by originality. They see patterns no one else sees. They formulate hypotheses no one else has imagined. They connect ideas in unexpected ways. In other words, they are unusually creative.
And creativity, too, has been studied in depth. What we know is not especially comforting for those who want to treat eccentric scientific beliefs as a badge of intellectual authority.
First, the IQ of highly creative individuals is usually only moderately above average within their professional group. The very highest IQ scorers are rarely the most creative minds. Intelligence and creativity overlap, but they are not the same trait.
Second, creative people score extremely high on the personality dimension known as openness. They are drawn to new ideas, unconventional perspectives, experimental lifestyles, avant-garde art—and, inevitably, to strange and speculative theories that more cautious minds would dismiss.
Third, creative personalities display a curious duality. On standard personality tests, they often appear psychologically mature and stable. But when examined for various atypical traits, eccentricities, and subclinical pathologies, they also show elevated levels of all of those as well.
In plain language: among elite scientists, there are many oddballs.
It should not surprise us, then, that some of them flirt with voices from the cosmos, mystical quantum depths, or fashionable metaphysical fantasies. What should surprise us is how quickly the public confuses these eccentric beliefs with scientific competence itself. A brilliant capacity for analysis does not immunize anyone against nonsense—and in highly creative personalities, it may even coexist quite comfortably with it.
Respect the science. Admire the achievements. But do not mistake intellectual originality for epistemic infallibility.