and i don't believe in time

i'm still not sure exactly why i chose to name this blog what i did... i guess that i didn't think that i would use it for more than a couple of days, so i just didn't really care at the time. now that it has been several weeks, i'm feeling tempted to start a new blog with a name that's a little more representative of what i'm about. we'll see though. i still don't really feel like i've found my blog-niche, so maybe we'll keep it as is.

one of the reasons i'm re-thinking the blog name is because i don't really believe in time. i know this sounds strange -- when i told my folks, they looked at me like i'd joined some sort of cult. i guess i should be more specific though. i believe that time exists insofar as it is part of the way that we as humans perceive the world around us, but it doesn't exist in that it is not some external thing in the environment. i believe that if human brains were structured differently, we would not be constrained by time at all. i know this either seems super looney or retardedly philosphical, but i just think it's strange for someone who doesn't believe in time to elegize about a youth that's been "lost." in fact, i don't actually believe that my youth is lost. i feel like it still exists in some sense, i'm just unable to revisit it because of my inability to see past the laws of time.

i first realized that i was a little kookier than your average joe at the ripe old age of 3 (or perhaps 4). maybe i'm not the only one who's had this experience, but one day i walked into my preschool class and -- perhaps i was overly tired from a late night of partying -- but i wondered if i was still asleep and only dreaming that i was in my classroom. i realized that i had no way of proving to myself that my body was really awake and experiencing the classroom. it kind of frightened me, but then i shook it off and went back learning the basics of walking with scissors. it didn't really come up again until i took my first philosophy class, and i learned that a guy named decartes had the same difficulty at a much older age. after confirming my realization that i wasn't the only kook out there, i went on to study psychology. i thought, "for sure, these psychologists have faced this conundrum head-on and come up with a brilliant way that we can prove that what we see is what is out there." after a disappointing (though actually fantastically interesting) class on sensation and perception, i realized that they really have no clue either. it was this realization that led me to truly accept my intuitive belief that the world "out there" really has very little to do with what i experience "in here" (namely in my brain). that said, since i haven't been able to find any other way to be, i guess i'll just go on and enjoy myself while i'm here...

i'd love to hear what other folks have to say on the subject... assuming any of ya'll think that this is interesting...at...all...