The universe didn't force you not to believe in magic. You could have spent your whole life believing magnets are magical stones, that the electromagnetic force is magical energy, and that computer engineers are wizards who conjure spirits from magic. And you could have been 100% factually and scientifically correct.
But you chose to believe that magic is by definition not real, because you didn't want to live in a world of whimsy and wonder. You defined magic as supernatural, in opposition to the natural world. While every scientist knows that nature is just a word for everything that exists. You chose to define magic in a way that it wouldn't exist, denying it through tautology and not through science.
Why did you choose that?
KidnappedByKitties nailed it, I think.
But I absolutely love and agree with your perspective, too. I think we went too hard into understanding the physical side of reality while rejecting the role of spirituality with the Enlightenment.
I believe physical reality is just one side of a coin.
We need to regain a spiritual view without giving up how we understand physical reality, and without all the literal trappings of organized religion.
A second Enlightenment?
Why can't the physical side be magic too? Why did you choose to define magic as nonphysical?
I didn't. I think reality is made up of both equally. Two sides of a coin.