  What is the "right way" to define dimension? Mathematicians working in the
early and middle $20$th-century formalized three intuitive definitions of
dimension that all turned out to be equivalent on separable metric spaces. But
were these definitions the "right" ones? What would it mean to have the "right"
definition of dimension? In this paper we attempt to inspire thought about
these questions by introducing Abbott dimension, a geometrically intuitive
definition of dimension based on Edwin Abbott's $1884$ novella \emph{Flatland}.
We show that while Abbott dimension has intuitive appeal, it does not always
agree with the classical definitions of dimension on separable metric spaces.
