Humankinds place

These are two things I think I know:

1) My mind is not as great as nature's
2) We can understand at least a part of nature

Based on this:

Can I put my mind aside from nature, or parts of nature to analyse it?

Or;

Am I a part of nature such that anything I know is really done for some purpose of nature; and my knowing of it is meaningless in self-referral?

I think purpose is how you look at it. Many people get a cat in their house for the purpose of catching mice. But to a cat, the purpose of catching a mouse is for fun. We as humans are in a unique position though, we are able to analyze things which means we can make our own purposes. If you want your purpose in life to be making sandwiches at a subway, then you can actually accomplish that.

Can you define nature? Everything part of the Earth that isn't man?

Well, to be able to look at our true purpose would be to look at the next level of intelligence that is above us. The cat cannot understand exactly why we took it into the house, sure it can draw its own conclusions but it will never know for sure unless we could somehow communicate with it. And communication with a cat is impossible, there is an intelligence barrier. So I don't think true purpose can ever be known, but like the cat, we should just do what we think is fun.

Is nature everything but me?

I'm sure Einstein said it was. I disagree.

Psychologists would say that its possible to predict other people's behaviour based on stereotypes. Why does this not apply to the psychologist either?

I think that my capacity to think prevents me from being open to what causes me to do things in totality. So it seems the solution is to live in our illusion. But does this not set us free thinking that if we can analyse a baterium and its behaviour and it is living; are we not just a part in a play? I can't see any practical purose to this other than that our definition of 'practical' is limited.

Agreed lets have fun.

"So it seems the solution is to live in our illusion."

I agree almost 100% with that statement. But.. I don't think what we live in is an illusion at all. We are stuck in these windows of intelligence. ie. infinity doesn't make sense, other concepts are impossible to fully grasp. This I believe is due to our intelligence barrier, however, we must accept where we are and not try to transcend it. Seriously, whats the point? There would be another intelligence barrier above that and etc. Most likely there is an infinity of them. So I believe we should play the role that we are given and live truly just to what is us. That is happiness to me.

You mean ignorance is happiness? True. But can you still say that, after knowing that youre living in it?

I believe ignorance is happiness to a certain point. Again, ignorance is relative. You can say a child is ignorant but it is certainly much more intelligent than an ant.

I simply meant that I acknowledge the humans intelligence barrier. I think that one day, if humans can manage to use alternate forms of energy other than the sun, humans will learn everything there is to know about this space that we live in and only then do I believe we (the human race as a whole) can transcend this intelligence window. I base this assumption on the pattern of human evolution. Where we are going seems to be full understanding of this universe.

Man is part of nature, an ideology shared by many of the ancients, and ressurected today in contemporary Shamanistic and Animistic religions.

"We are an inseperable part of nature. As we harm the nature around us, we harm ourselves."
Can't remember where I read that.
But, in my opinion, nature is of course non-sentient. She will balance herself of course. If there is an over abundance of food, Deer will increase their population, as Deer increases, so will Wolf to re-balance.

So to say one is a tool of nature in the way you suggest, I would have to disagree.