Mohsen Ezz El-Din Al-Bakr
Registered Member
One morning, I found myself pondering a thought that, on the surface, seemed quite logical:
Is there a connection between hair growth and academic intelligence—specifically, logical-mathematical intelligence?
The idea didn’t come from a scientific paper or a documented study. It came from something much more personal: an observation.
Most of my family members don’t suffer from baldness, yet they’ve consistently shown strong academic performance and notable aptitude in school.
I began linking appearance with substance. I wondered if thick hair might biologically reflect some form of genetic health correlated with scientific intelligence.
Of course, there are many types of intelligence, including social intelligence, but what I had in mind was the kind of intelligence tied to success in the natural sciences and mathematics—the so-called logical-mathematical intelligence.
Naturally, I wasn’t thinking of politicians or broadcasters or economists—many of whom, bald or not, fill our screens.
I was fixated on a narrower category: excellence in scientific domains. Not artistic, social, or leadership-related intelligences—just this one.
To support my hunch, I began mentally flipping through images of great scientists.
I recalled Newton, Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Stephen Hawking, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Carl Sagan, Lawrence Krauss, Michael Faraday... and others who, in my memory, all seemed to have a full head of hair—some even impressively so.
I told myself: maybe there is a pattern here…
But then something stopped me.
A voice inside whispered:
"Are you just seeing what you want to see?"
That moment was the turning point.
What I was doing—unconsciously—was a classic case of confirmation bias:
We selectively gather evidence that supports our preexisting belief, while ignoring or downplaying anything that contradicts it.
Instead of continuing to pamper my theory, I decided to test it. Not with scattered impressions, but with a method.
---
The Experiment: A Sample of 100 Scientists
I compiled a list of 100 of the most renowned physicists in history.
I analyzed their portraits, read about them, and classified each one into three categories:
H = Full Hair
H T = Thinning Hair
B = Baldness
I expected the "H" group to dominate—perhaps due to a subconscious desire to affirm my own inclusion in that group.
But the results told a different story. The proportions across the three categories were quite balanced.
No clear majority emerged to support any single conclusion. Baldness was as naturally represented as hair—just like in the general population.
It was not an indicator of superior or inferior academic intelligence.
---
So, what did I learn?
The issue wasn’t really about hair.
Nor was it about scientists.
It was about me—and about you, whenever we lean toward beliefs that comfort us more than they inform us.
It was about how I almost built a theory from a private desire, not from real data.
Fortunately, I caught myself in time—and chose to wear the hat of an investigator, not that of a believer.
In the end, I didn’t discover much about hair…
But I did learn something precious about the mind, the self, and the nature of real science.
Science does not take sides.
It tests, it verifies, it refutes.
It doesn’t strengthen our beliefs—it challenges them.
And if the evidence betrays our assumptions, that’s not failure.
It’s the mind’s greatest victory—because it means we’re closer to the truth.
---
Warm regards,
Always giving
Mohsen Ezz El-Din Al-Bakri
Is there a connection between hair growth and academic intelligence—specifically, logical-mathematical intelligence?
The idea didn’t come from a scientific paper or a documented study. It came from something much more personal: an observation.
Most of my family members don’t suffer from baldness, yet they’ve consistently shown strong academic performance and notable aptitude in school.
I began linking appearance with substance. I wondered if thick hair might biologically reflect some form of genetic health correlated with scientific intelligence.
Of course, there are many types of intelligence, including social intelligence, but what I had in mind was the kind of intelligence tied to success in the natural sciences and mathematics—the so-called logical-mathematical intelligence.
Naturally, I wasn’t thinking of politicians or broadcasters or economists—many of whom, bald or not, fill our screens.
I was fixated on a narrower category: excellence in scientific domains. Not artistic, social, or leadership-related intelligences—just this one.
To support my hunch, I began mentally flipping through images of great scientists.
I recalled Newton, Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Stephen Hawking, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Carl Sagan, Lawrence Krauss, Michael Faraday... and others who, in my memory, all seemed to have a full head of hair—some even impressively so.
I told myself: maybe there is a pattern here…
But then something stopped me.
A voice inside whispered:
"Are you just seeing what you want to see?"
That moment was the turning point.
What I was doing—unconsciously—was a classic case of confirmation bias:
We selectively gather evidence that supports our preexisting belief, while ignoring or downplaying anything that contradicts it.
Instead of continuing to pamper my theory, I decided to test it. Not with scattered impressions, but with a method.
---
The Experiment: A Sample of 100 Scientists
I compiled a list of 100 of the most renowned physicists in history.
I analyzed their portraits, read about them, and classified each one into three categories:
H = Full Hair
H T = Thinning Hair
B = Baldness
I expected the "H" group to dominate—perhaps due to a subconscious desire to affirm my own inclusion in that group.
But the results told a different story. The proportions across the three categories were quite balanced.
No clear majority emerged to support any single conclusion. Baldness was as naturally represented as hair—just like in the general population.
It was not an indicator of superior or inferior academic intelligence.
---
So, what did I learn?
The issue wasn’t really about hair.
Nor was it about scientists.
It was about me—and about you, whenever we lean toward beliefs that comfort us more than they inform us.
It was about how I almost built a theory from a private desire, not from real data.
Fortunately, I caught myself in time—and chose to wear the hat of an investigator, not that of a believer.
In the end, I didn’t discover much about hair…
But I did learn something precious about the mind, the self, and the nature of real science.
Science does not take sides.
It tests, it verifies, it refutes.
It doesn’t strengthen our beliefs—it challenges them.
And if the evidence betrays our assumptions, that’s not failure.
It’s the mind’s greatest victory—because it means we’re closer to the truth.
---
Warm regards,
Always giving
Mohsen Ezz El-Din Al-Bakri
