What do I mean by this statement?  What hidden treasure is in this idea?  Do I really intend for the reader to give up all sanity and spend the rest of their life in an institution?  Yes, and no, let me explain.

 As I see it there are basically three different ways to handle a "breakdown."  The polite term, "breakdown," is in fact what I am refering to here.  the general idea can be extrapolated to include those people with true chemical imbalances, but the fine line being walked here, becomes even thiner, and the risks must be weighed by the individual.  And so, I'll leave that up to the individual.  Instead I am talking about those people who find the world is to much for them, and can simply not take it anymore.  Those people who appear to get better after nothing more then a good rest, away from the world.  Now that that's out of the way, let's get back to what I was saying.

 There are three ways to handle a "breakdown."  The two traditional ways are to give in completly, and give up on sanity.  And find yourself living in the breakdown for a significant amount of time.  The other traditional way is to give into "reality."  To live as a servant to that which is handed to you, and live in a world where your boundries are set, and you must live in those boundries.
 But, there is a third alternative.  And this alternative is what I mean by the idea of "true freedom" in the above statement.  Here the individual transends insanity, moves beyond it, and lives in a world of their own creation.
 The reason I say this is "transending reality," is because, to "normal" people, you are crazy.  You live in a scizophreanic world.  And it would not be unheard of for some conservative doctors to classify you as schizophreanic.
 I say though, that this is the only way to live free in this world.  To live by your own rules, and live as you wish to.

 The noted science fiction writer, Philip K. Dick, was known to say, "reality is those things, that when you stop beleaving in them, don't go away."  I say, that if they haven't gone away, you haven't truely stopped beleaving in them.  For everything is subject to interpretation, and reevaluation.  We live in a time where science disproves it self every day.

 Orthodox Darwinism, which we were all taught in biology class, is under heavy fire, and no longer stands up to statistical fact.  The common analogy is that Orthodox Darwinism states that if you throw your garbage over your neighbor's fence for a couple of millienium, one day you will find a fully functional 747, with a full flight crewe, and a full tank of gas, over there.
 We live in a day and age where high level physics is getting closer and closer to proving that magick exists.  The idea that two entities that come in contact, stay in contact on a quantum level, is one of the interpretations of Bell's Theorum (specifically this is refered to as, Bell's Theorum, where locality fails), it is also a common layman's way of interpreting the Law of Assosiation.  One of the oldest and most basic laws in magick.
 For those who are wondering why I keep misspelling magic, I am not.  The spelling magick is quite common.  It is a tool used by some true magicians, to seperate their art from that of stage magic.  It is not universal, and is in fact probably used by a minority, but I have decided to use it, because I wish to punctuate the difference between stage magic and real magick.
 What ever the spelling of magick though, it does not take away from the fact that science is not as sound as we have been lead to beleave.  And it will come to pass that the truely observiant person will one day have to question everything that is around them.  The day will come when it is no longer acceptable to just question those ideas that have been designated as "philosophical."  Instead, everything will be up for grabs.  And everything will be open to interpretation.  Right down to the very nature of the world we live in.

 The eastern view of the world is one of a constant state of flux and change.  The western view of the world is one of an entitiy to be studied and quantified.  In the end, it is my opinion, that the eastern view will win out.  Science is even starting to come to terms with this.  Everyday, Chaos Theory gains another convert.  Chaos Theory is the idea that an element of chaos must be included in every scientific "fact."  The exception that disproves the rule.  The _New Hackers Dictionary_ (a dictionary of computer geek terminology) even contains an entry for Discordianism, a religion based upon the worship of Eris, the Greek goddess of Chaos and Dischord.
 Science still holds to the idea of an objective reality.  One that can be quantified, and studied.  One that is single and whole for us all.  I say that that reality does not exist.  That we live in a world of consensus and subjective reality.  Where we are all are free to define the world in out own ideas.  And in terms of our own whims.  As long as we realize that those whims hold no real meaning outside of our own personal reality.
 The day is coming when everything is open to question.  From the questions about the existence of life after death, to the true nature of the "law of gravity."  It is all suspect.  And only the schizophreanic mind will be able to handle the changes that are to come.  Only someone who is willing to doubt the validity of "scientific fact" will be able to handle the changes that are to come.

 There are those who will brandish me a lunatic.  But, that is the point.  The time will come when the lunatics are hailed as profits, and the very idea of "objective" reality will be laughed at.

 In my mind, the question is not, am I right?  The question is, when will I be proven right?