No it won't. The scientific explanations are often more complex, rich, and interesting than the supernatural explanations. One doesn't have to invent explanations to spice up the universe. It's already infinitely fascinating and beautiful.
So if it's already infinitely beautiful and fascinating then why aren't mythological explanations part of the beauty? I would argue that purely scientific explanations are often lacking in the areas of emotional content and meaning which are so vital to the human psyche. I for one certainly would not want to trade all poetry, folklore, literature, mythology, mysticism and religious books for more science books.
No, it's not. Rational thought is concerned with the objective by definition.
I think what he meant was that, whether an idea or belief is deemed "rational" is quite subjective. For example, some might say believing in telepathy was not rational. However if you came from a tribe of people who practiced telepathy on a regular bases, you would have a completely different view on that matter. And it is like this with many things. What's obviously true to one person, is considered irrational by the next. I agree that rationality is concerned with the objective, which is why in philosophy you study logic and its laws. But when you begin making interpretations about the world where there still many unknowns, then it becomes incredibly subjective.
Last edited: