I've often wondered about the human condition and its continued rantings on the acceptance on the views of the sanity of others. When you stop to consider the changes it has made over time, you see a trend not unlike the rise of the influenza virus; which is to say, something that is redefined on a regular basis, with the essential things kept, but the parameters altered to fit the times.
It started as a simple concept: Him bring food. He good. Simple, direct, and unassuming, right? Caveman logic at its finest, one might say. This , though, is the idea of sanity that persisted for a great many years.
As the world evolved, so too did the view of sanity. Most of the jigs and jogs are alike in their simplicity, but it is the definitions of the last 50 years or so that provoke the most interest. The main thought behind it, the essential thread is mostly: so long as the reality you hold to mirrors mine in 98% of all things, with no major differences, you are sane. The changing parameters, though, have been drastic; first it was: and you should support our govenment because they pulled us out of a major catastrophy. About 10-12 years later, it became: trust no one because they might be a "pinko"(I mean nothing mean, it's the term used). Then it became: follow no one be your own individual, like me(and the entire counter-culture changed and became the same "individual", lol). Now it is vauge, ut has returned to a more post WWII thought, so long as you are with us, you are one of us. I still believe in an old school of thought: To be mad is to be closer to divinity; to shun the shackles of the mind is to embrace the will of Wills.
Sanity is a strange thing...
