Remember119104:If the theory of evolution is true then there is no question why a "random universe" can create rationality.
With all due respect and apologies if you already are aware of this and evolution through natural selection is the EXACT OPPOSITE of "random". Check out some of Dawkin's info on the subject. I am presently working my way through "On the Origin of the Species" by a one C. Darwin, something I was NEVER allowed to do growing up. I had always cringed at the argument of creationists/id-ers that evolution was just "random chance". Turns out that is a strawman of the actual theory. Only ONE event requires "random chance", the initial formation of life on a planet capable of supporting it. For that, we turn to statistics. If we assign a chance of a planet capable of supporting life at 1 in say 500 billion, an infantesimal number, that's still several BILLION planets in the universe capable of supporting life. You read that right, there are several hundred TRILLION planets out there as near as we can tell. If we say that the "life formation event" is a 1 in 5 billion chance of occuring, that means that of the approximately 100 billion planets capable of supporting life, 20 of them presently have it. After the "life formation event" on one of these 20 or so planets, natural selection takes over, much like a dog or horse or sheep or goat breeder takes over after a puppy is born with a trait he finds particularly attractive/useful/etc. In the case of natural selection though it's all about two things, survival and propogation. Live and breed. Any adaptation or change that improves an entities ability to do that in it's environment will be "selected" by nature.
As to why a natural selection would "select" the rational facility, well, I think it's pretty obvious due to the fact that we are the most successful and prolific species on the planet. We approach viral or bacterial levels of success (in terms of survival/thriving), something that no other higher-order animal has been remotely capable of achieving. Our facility for rationality makes us capable of adaptation to environments on a MUCH wider scale than our animal cousins. Most animals can only survive in a fairly narrow geographical region. This fact is obscured by man's capacity, born of his rational facility, to alter and adapt his environment and even alter other life-forms to make one or both suitable for the other. This is really just scratching the surface as to why "rationality" would be selected. Dawkins talks a bit about it in "The God Delusion" if you are interested. I still have yet to listen to "The Ancestor's Tale" but I have it. I'm just waiting to finish Darwin's book first. 
Funny enough, in a pretty common twist of psychological projection it is the "God Theory" that requires "random chance" moreso than evolution through natural selection. Seriously, what are the chances that an un-created entity would opt to "create something" and that something would just happen to turn out to be us?
Anyway, just some interesting information I felt like sharing. I hope you don't mind.
"False ideas never die; only their supporters eventually snuff it." - Hervé This