Thanks, MugaSofer, for yours constructive reply. No, I am not a native English and my brain was hard-wired at the salvage jungle here, so, I think is a good opportunity for me debating our different experiences and world views. I hope that it must be curious for you too.

You said: " Well, our personalities, memories and so on can be affected by interfering with the brain, and it certainly looks like it's doing some sort of information processing (as far as we can tell), so ... seems unlikely, to be honest."

Yes, these things (personality, memories, etc.) composes our " state of being" and they are merely product of brains/nature. But, we have a real phenomena where we watch the emergence of consciousnesses without being product of brains: the embryo. There is no natural architecture able to be conscious of its existence, neither are the brains alone. So, where comes from the conscious state of embryos? From a superior hierarchic system that exists beyond his universe (the womb), and this system is called " human species" . So, it is not zero the probability that human mind is product of a hidden superior natural system whose bits-information are invading our immediate world and being aggregated to our synapses, besides the possibility that it was encrypted into our genes (if my models about Matrix/DNA are right).

You said: "Are you saying evolution will make us irrational? Or that rationality is incompatible with lovecraftian puppetry? Or something completely different?"

No, evolution will make us more suitable to real natural world. But, due the alternation between chaos and order, and due our origins coming from chaos, the flow of order (which is the basis for rationality) is the baby and weak force just now. Chaos is dying, order is growing, but now, chaos still is the strongest, so. irrationality and randomness are the winners, by while.

You said: " You ... realize human's didn't evolve in the Amazon, right?"

I don't understand your question. Being still virgin and untouchable, the elements of Amazon hidden niches are witness of life's origins. And we see chaos here. So, our origins came from terrestrial chaotic state of Nature, which came from ordered state of Cosmos... Cyclic alternations.

You said: " I'm not sure I'd characterize the natural world as "chaotic" as such. Complex, sometimes, sure, but it follows some pretty simple rules, and when we deduce these rules we can manipulate them."

Natural world is the Universe, not this terrestrial biosphere alone. This biosphere is a kind of disturbance, a noise, in relation to the ordered state of Cosmos. Biosphere is product of an entropic process, like the radiation of sun. So, the disturbance is corrected by the ordered Cosmos, from which is coming the emergence of those rules you are talking about. The curious thing is that humans are the carriers of those rules, we are bringing order to our salvage environment.

You said: " The universe is definitely ordered, but don't forget evolution can produce some pretty "designed" looking structures."

The Universe, as a conglomerate of galaxies, seems to be mass with no shape, not a system. We don't know if there is a nucleus, relations among parts, etc. We can't know if it is ordered or chaotic. Evolution is the result of a flow of energy moving inside this Universe. Like any fetus is under evolution due a genetic flow producing more designed looking structures. The source of this "evolution" is a natural system (human species) living beyond the fetus' universe (the womb). This is the unique real natural parameter we have for theories about the universe.

You said: You seem to be treating "order" and "chaos" more like elemental forces or something, and generally sound like you've got problems with magical thinking.

It is not magical thinking, it is the normal natural chain of causes and effects. Every system that reaches an ordered state is attacked by entropy, which produces chaos, from which lift up order again, but each cycle is more complex than the ancestors cycles. At chaotic states, like our biosphere, generations of empty minds are more likely to be winners, while generations of reasonable minds must be losers at short time and the final winner at long time. But, maybe the jungle is teaching me everything wrong. What do you think?