Problem with spatial dimensions is that none can actually *exist* without Time. If finite distance is traversed in 0 time, it means that arrival and departure occur simultaneously, or there is no distance to even ponder about. Nothing can exist between 2 points as existence preassumes non-zero time.
Pure 3D-space in math is abstract idea, and even it has problems with time - to *exist* is to be *in* time.
Strictly, there is no length or width or height alone, there can only be length AND time, height AND time, etc.
Therefore I'd say that we live in 3d-spacetime. But usually ignore time for convenience and due to urge to dismantle things and keep them separate.
Time is confusing and mysterious. There seems to exist 2 meanings to time, as coordinate point for chain of states of existence, and as enabler of spatial reality itself.
Any measure of spatial reality needs reference, for that we have velocity of light. As coordinate of existence, we need only fact of change, ordered. Two different states separated by single change can be separated only by single step of time for internal observer, even if either state exists for differing length of time for external observer. Thus intensity of change becomes equivalent to speed of timeflow.
As to imagining spatial dimensions, closest to my braincells I've seen is comparison of displaying 3D environment on your 2D flat monitor. In same way you can transpose imginary 4D environment onto 3D, and then onto 2D monitor. This has actually been done. Looks weird.
I'd personally seek for qualitatively different sense to additional dimensions. Spatial dimensions are complete. Time adds coordinate if you are after one, but to go further, I'd seek for more fancy things, like perhaps universe inside proton, or dimension for curvature of space. But in math, anything like 100 and more dimensions look cool and offer useful models. I'm suspicious about their relation to reality though.