Matt Fradd
Spirituality/Belief • Books • Writing
Barry Baxter - Chapter 1
October 21, 2024
post photo preview

Hello dear fellows and sheilas of the Locals community. Here is a little story I've been working on called Barry Baxter and the Magical Pygmy Possums

Please comment below so I know you've read it. If people are getting sick of these I'll stop.

Summary

Prologue 

---

Chapter 2

So this one hot day in January me and my mate Z were driving to Kapow! Windows down, Farmer’s Union Iced Coffe’s in hand; loving life. We were on our way to play Mindcraft. And no, I don’t mean Minecraft. I mean Mindcraft. Think D&D for intelligent people. So anyway we walk in through the shop and the bell rings, the bell on the door, you know? And I see this girl there that I hadn’t seen before and she’s wearing these shoes that are fluffy like kittens. And I think to myself, “man, those shoes look like kittens.” No sooner did I think this than her shoes actually turned into kittens. Like real kittens. Sorry, I need you to understand this. I don’t mean her shoes changed into different shoes. Shoes that looked like kittens or shoes that had pictures of kittens on them. I mean her shoes were gone and in their place, a pair of gray kittens … I watched them—the kittens—screech in agony right before they died. The girls' feet were in the kittens. Like in the kittens. Through their backs and I guess into their innards. I can only assume they materialized out of nothing and then lived long enough to be crushed by that girl. Freaked everyone out, obviously. Gus and the rest of the guys at the store—including Z—just assumed the girl brought the cats in with her and that they didn’t notice until, according to them, she just jumped on them. Place went crazy. People were screaming, chairs were pushed back, a table flipped over, cards and dice and game pieces scattered over the floor. Kapow! closed for the day. There was an investigation. Not sure whatever happened to that girl. Probably in some kind of home. No one believed her, of course. Poor thing.

Poor ol’ Z, being an animal lover, took a while to recover. Wasn’t in the mood to play Mindcraft. Said he wanted to go home. Play some Zelda. “No worries,” I said. We hit up Maccas on the way home. Sustenance. 

So we get back to Z’s house and I’m watching him playing the new Zelda. But I wasn’t really watching if you know what I mean. My eyes were pointed at the screen but I was all up in my head. Trying to understand what had happened. Wondering if it really were me who made those cats appear. So I look down at my shoes. They were red. I imagined them yellow. Boom, they turned yellow. Pretty freaky, hey? So then I start wondering if it’s just shoes or if I can make other stuff happen. I look across the room at this replica of Sting Z has from The Lord of the Rings. I imagined it with a scabbard. Nothing happened. I imagined it with a scabbard again. This time concentrating really hard. Nothing. Weird, I thought. I then looked down at my watch and imagined it with a different strap. I had to concentrate. Boom! It turned from one of those annoying bloody metal one’s that pinch your arm hair into a black leather one. 

I turned to Z wondering how to tell him. Z, I said, “you know that thing that happened at the shop.” “Shit,” he said, “don’t bloody remind me.” “Well, I said, umm. I have some news about that.” He’s like, “yeah?” “Well,” I said. “That lady didn’t jump on those cats. You see … what happened was. … I turned her shoes into cats. With my mind.” Z just laughed in an awkward sort of way. Then when I didn’t laugh with him he looked at me and then stopped laughing. He was like, “you’re not serious.” And I looked at him and I said, “Z, my friend, I’m as serious as a heart attack. I turned her shoes into kittens. On accident, obviously.” He put down the controller and asked me why I’d joke about that kinda thing and said I knew that he loved cats and that it wasn’t funny. I took a sip of my Iced  Coffee, cracked my knuckles and then asked him if he believed in evolution. Weird question, right? I was trying to throw him off. Shake him out of his closed minded ways of thinking. “What the hell are you talking about?” he said. I asked him a second time, eyes wider and head slightly tilted for effect, “do ... you” I asked, spacing out the words “believe …  in … evolution? Survival of the fittest, that all life forms have evolved from a single-celled organism.” He just looked at me and asked what the hell all this had to do with exploding kittens. Hah! Literally just made that connection. … Anyway, I tell him to just answer the question. He says he does. Okay, I said. “Now, what if we could rewind the film of evolution and play it again. Isn’t it possible that instead of the life forms we now see, a whole different set of creatures could have evolved.” He agreed and so I said, “men like us could have had wings.” Z began screwing up his face like he was about to object but I didn’t have time for that so I interrupted him and said, “I’m just saying it’s possible, no?” He relented and said “sure, it’s possible.” “What about our five senses,” I asked him. “Isn’t it possible that we could have evolved with fewer? Worms, for example, can’t see. Don’t have eyes. Z, again, was about to object. Said something about light receptors. “Yeah, that’s great mate,” I said. “They can’t bloody see the way we can. Light receptors aren’t sight the way we know sight. That’s all I’m saying.” He gave me a skeptical look. “Alright then, how would you explain what a rainbow looks like to a worm? Go on, try it.” Z just looked at me and said he wasn’t going to try it. “But you get my point,” I said. “Our five senses engage five realms—as it were—of reality: eyes see, ears hear, noses smell, tongues …” “Yeah, I get it, I get it. What’s your point though?” Not as quick on his feet as me, old Z. I looked at him and said “my point is that if certain life forms have evolved with fewer senses than we, and if it’s possible that we could have evolved with fewer too, maybe … just maybe it’s possible we could have evolved with more. Think about that,” I said. “How crazy is the concept of sight to a worm?” “Yeah,” said Z with that skeptical look again. “a worm can’t understand us though,” “Anything we try to say to it would be incomprehensible.” “Fine,” I said, “a blind man, then. blind from birth. He can understand me, can’t he.” “Sure,” said Z, “all things being equal.” “All things being bloody equal.” I said in a mocking tone. “What are you doing? Trying to derail the conversation at all costs?” “Fine,” he said “yes. He can understand you.” “Thank you,” I said. “Now, Imagine trying to make him comprehend what the color purple is like. How do you describe what a mountain looks like or a sunset, or any of that? Go on, try it” Z said he wasn’t going to try it. “But you get my point,” I said. “Just like a man blind from birth couldn’t comprehend colors and things so we with our five senses wouldn’t be able to comprehend a sixth realm which lies completely beyond our realm of sensation. You see?”

Z, fed up with the conversation, picked up his controller and began playing Zelda again. Without looking at me He asks why I’m so sure a sixth realm exists and didn’t this all amount to an argument from silence.

“Shall I show you how I know,” I asked?  “Sure,” Z said, his eyes not moving from the screen in front of him, “why don’t you show me.” And that’s when I turned his television into a gigantic potato chip. I didn’t imagine it bolted to the wall, I guess, so it dropped from where the TV was and hit the floor.

Z—and I swear I’m not making this up—Z drops his controller to the floor and looks at me with a jaw that couldn’t have dropped lower if he tried. I get up and walk towards the potato chip which had broken a bit from hitting the floor. “You see?” I said and took a bite out of it. Tasted good too. Z stood up and tried desperately to speak but couldn’t. Said later that it was like a hundred sentences were trying to come out of his mouth and all got jammed there. “It’s alright, I said. You’re looking at me like a worm looks at a man. Not that a worm has eyes. We’ve been through that. The point is … the point is,” I said. The point is you’re afraid; but you don’t need to be, okay? That realm of reality that no one has accessed up until now. The realm that is so unthinkable it’s laughable. … I’ve accessed it. Just like sight and touch enables me to manipulate lego, say, or Link on the screen over there, so this new realm I’ve tapped into enables me to manipulate reality. Z went to sit back down on the couch but missed. He got right back up again and looked at me and then looked at the chip, and then looked at me. “Have a bite,” I said, “go on.” He finally got one of those sentences out: “what happened to my TV? Where the hell did this potato chip come from?” And a thousand more questions like that. I was like, “Z, mate, I just told you. I can change things with my mind.” 

Without taking his eyes off of me he pointed at a lamp in the corner and said, okay. … change that into a … into a … gherkin.” “A gherkin?” I asked and he was like, yeah, a gherkin. So I did. The lamp vanished in an instant and I saw a gherkin fall from where the lamp shade was to the carpet. Z started to laugh in a sort of crazy way as he walked over to inspect the gherkin. I for some reason was completely calm. Z and our buddy Karen—who I haven’t mentioned yet. We’ll get to her soon. Anyway, they’re always asking how I’m so calm and level headed and intelligent. That’s just me, you know?

community logo
Join the Matt Fradd Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
12
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
The Human Excellence that Technology Can Never Replace - Fr. Gregory Pine, O.P.

Squad, I've been thinking about AI lately. It's not that I understand the technology, though I am trying some, but that my limited understanding has given me occasion to think specifically about what is distinctive to the human person. And, it turns out, those distinctive notes are incredibly precious. In this video, I'm think about our call to conversation for intimacy . . . look forward to chatting with you there.

00:21:22
My Weird Thoughts on AI - Fr. Gregory Pine, O.P.

We're in a golden age of artificial intelligence, but it's already begun to raise interesting ethical questions. What is it doing to my agency? What is it doing to my projects? I'm no expert, but I've thought about it a little bit. Here are my thoughts . . .

00:20:38
We Have a Pope + An Announcement! - Fr. Gregory Pine, O.P.

A lot of us were simultaneously looking forward to and getting super anxious about the conclave. Why exactly is that? Is this just like a political election and we're nervous until our candidate wins? How are we supposed to think about our ecclesial life in these times and how should our ecclesial thinking differ from our political thinking? Ooo, plus a fun little announcement : )

00:19:10
Simple NEW Lofi Song

Working on an entire album of lofi music. Here's one of those songs. Album should drop next week. THEN, a couple of weeks after that we hope to have our 24/7 stream up and running.

Simple NEW Lofi Song
December 01, 2022
Day 5 of Advent

THE ERROR OF ARIUS ABOUT THE INCARNATION

In their eagerness to proclaim the unity of God and man in Christ, some heretics went to the opposite extreme and taught that not only was there one person, but also a single nature, in God and man. This error took its rise from Arius. To defend his position that those scriptural passages where Christ is represented as being inferior to the Father, must refer to the Son of God Himself, regarded in His assuming nature, Arius taught that in Christ there is no other soul than the Word of God who, he maintained, took the place of the soul in Christ’s body. Thus when Christ says, in John 14:28, “The Father is greater than I,” or when He is introduced as praying or as being sad, such matters are to be referred to the very nature of the Son of God. If this were so, the union of God’s Son with man would be effected not only in the person, but also in the nature. For, as we know, the unity of human nature arises from the union of soul and body.

The...

Day 5 of Advent
November 27, 2022
Day 1 of Advent

RESTORATION OF MAN BY GOD THROUGH THE INCARNATION

We indicated above that the reparation of human nature could not be effected either by Adam or by any other purely human being. For no individual man ever occupied a position of pre-eminence over the whole of nature; nor can any mere man be the cause of grace. The same reasoning shows that not even an angel could be the author of man’s restoration. An angel cannot be the cause of grace, just as he cannot be man’s recompense with regard to the ultimate perfection of beatitude, to which man was to be recalled. In this matter of beatitude angels and men are on a footing of equality. Nothing remains, therefore, but that such restoration could be effected by God alone.

But if God had decided to restore man solely by an act of His will and power, the order of divine justice would not have been observed. justice demands satisfaction for sin. But God cannot render satisfaction, just as He cannot merit. Such a service pertains to one who ...

Day 1 of Advent

Hello Pints family! If you can offer a rosary or any prayers for my wife and unborn child as well as all expecting mothers and unborn children. She is in labor now. Many thanks and may God bless all of you. Glory to Jesus Christ!

Can I ask for a prayer?

This morning my little sister, 30 years old, passed away in childbirth in a hospital in SLC, leaving her husband, my nephew, and my family behind. She had a medical condition and refused doctors’ advice to have an abortion, intent on being a mother. She got to hold my nephew for a short moment before she passed.

I’m still in shock and don’t really know how I should feel, or can feel. She was young and I don’t think had life insurance, and it’s not clear who’s even going to be able to raise my nephew. I want to help but have no idea how to. Prayers are very appreciated.

I don’t know why it’s become my thing to post my wife’s iconography progress a session or two before she’s actually finished, but why break the habit? She’s almost there now—just the gold leaf, the inscription, and a few final highlights to go.

Divine Mercy has a deep place in our story. Years ago, after being away from the Church longer than we’d care to admit, this devotion drew us back—not just emotionally, but sacramentally. We made our confession on Divine Mercy Sunday and firmly resolved to begin the work of making our relationship right in the eyes of the Church. That moment wasn’t just a return, it was a re-rooting in the rays of mercy and we haven’t looked back since.

I’ve always seen Divine Mercy as a kind of bridge. The revelations to St. Faustina came in Poland and Lithuania, where Latin and Byzantine traditions have long kissed. The geography reflects the devotion: tender, radiant, deeply Christ-centered, with an undercurrent of silence and mystery.

...

post photo preview
post photo preview
Welcome to Locals!

A big and hearty welcome to all who have joined our Locals community!

Here's what to expect:

  1.  Interviews one week early (before they hit Youtube)
  2. The opportunity to ask my guests questions
  3. Exclusive biweekly spiritual direction videos from Fr. Pine
  4. Access to video courses such as:
  • 7 part series on St. Augustine's Confessions by Dr Chad Engelland (here).
  • 5 Part series on Salvation History by Dr Andrew Swafford (here).
  • 5 Part series on Flannery O'Connor by Fr Damian Ferrence (here).
  • 6 Part series on Love and Responsibility by Christopher West & Matt Fradd (here).
  • 5 Part Series o Aquinas' 5 ways by Dr. Ed Feser (here).

5. Occasional livestreams with me.

6. Knowing that you're supporting the work of Pints With Aquinas.

Thanks!

Read full Article
post photo preview
Life is very, very simple, actually.

There is a lot going on. We are confused about many things. Embarrassed that we are confused. Pretend not to be. Have a few soundbites we can rely on when the conversation turns to Trump or the state of the Church or what is going on in Israel and Gaza or the AI revolution. We hope they don’t press us because we know enough to answer two or three questions before they will hit bedrock and we will have nothing.

All of this can lead us to believe the lie that life is complicated. And since we cannot figure it out, we should either quit, or numb, or pretend, or run ourselves ragged trying to understand everything we think we should understand.

And yet life is simple. Very, very simple. There is very little to figure out.

Love what is good. Hate what is evil. But how? When I have willingly habituated myself to do the opposite. Pray. Repent. Keep turning away from distractions. Don’t hate yourself for failing. Hope in the good God who is better than you think He is. Who cares for you more than you think He does.

What are your duties? Do them with joy and attention. Don’t hate yourself when you fail at this. Pray. Repent. Have a sense of humor about your littleness. You are incredibly loved after all, remember?

Turn away from what is useless and petty and vulgar and think about what is excellent.

Say “Your will be done” 100 times a day, especially when things are bad or seem meaningless. Your headache. Your bad night sleep. The house you can’t seem to get around to tidying.

Be patient and gentle with stupid people who can’t seem to make themselves love or want to love what is good, yourself first and foremost.

Jesus, help me want to want to love you. Help me want to want to hate anything opposed to you or your kingdom.

Seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.
Read full Article
post photo preview
Is Knowledge Possible (No ... And Yes)

I want to begin by admitting that I’m an amateur when it comes to epistemology. I do have a master’s degree in philosophy, but epistemology wasn’t my area of focus. Some of you reading this will know more about the subject than I do. And to be honest, I’m a little nervous about the comments. There’s a good chance that if you engage with what I’m about to say in any real depth, I won’t understand you and it will be my fault that I don’t.

Okay, with that admission out of the way…

 

We've long assumed that knowledge requires three criteria: (1) belief, (2) truth, and (3) justification. In other words, to know something is to believe it, for it to be true, and to have good reason for believing it. That’s the classical definition: justified true belief (JTB).

And just real quick, if you’re wondering why knowledge can’t be defined by just the first two criteria, it’s because believing something that happens to be true is more like getting lucky than knowledge. Imagine I say it’s raining in Adelaide, but I have no reason for thinking so. I didn’t check my weather app or ask anyone who lives there. If it turns out that it is raining, I was right, but only by chance. That’s not knowledge. To genuinely know something, you need more than belief and truth, you need a reason for thinking it’s true. You need justification.

Okay …

Along Comes Gettier

Now, for a long time, this three-part definition held up well. But then, in 1963, Edmund Gettier came along and broke everything in three pages. You can read that paper here.

Gettier presented scenarios where someone has a belief that is both true and justified, yet we still hesitate to call it knowledge. Why? Because the belief turns out to be true by accident.

One of the most well-known examples (though not from Gettier himself but often used to illustrate his point) is the case of the stopped clock. A man glances at a clock that has stopped working, sees that it says 2:00, and forms the belief that it is 2:00. And it just so happens to be 2:00. His belief is true. He used a normally reliable method, checking the time on a clock. And yet, the method failed. The belief was correct purely by coincidence.

Can We Save “Knowledge”

Now, some have tried to save the classical definition by saying, “Well, that wasn’t really justified. The clock was broken, so the belief was faulty from the start.” But that kind of move just shifts the problem. If we start redefining justification every time we hit a weird case, we risk making it so strict that it no longer resembles what anyone would call a “justified belief.”

Others, like Alvin Goldman, proposed ditching the concept of justification entirely. Maybe knowledge isn’t about having reasons, but about using processes that generally lead to truth. This is called reliabilism: if your belief comes from a trustworthy process (like vision, memory, or scientific inference) it counts as knowledge.

But again, the clock case poses a problem. Even if the process is usually reliable, it clearly failed here. So are we back to calling this knowledge, even though it was true by luck?

Still others have suggested that knowledge is less about having the right reasons or processes, and more about the person doing the knowing. This is what’s known as virtue epistemology: the idea that knowledge is a kind of intellectual success rooted in intellectual virtue: careful thinking, honesty, openness to evidence. On this view, knowing isn’t about checking boxes; it’s about doing something well. Like an archer hitting the bullseyes, not by accident, but through skill.

That’s compelling. But even here, questions linger. How do we measure intellectual virtue? And isn’t it still possible to do everything right and end up wrong—or to be wrong for the right reasons and still, somehow, stumble into truth?

An (Initially) Unsettling Realization

Which brings me to a more unsettling thought.

If a belief like “it’s 2:00” can be true, feel justified, come from a reliable process, and still be the product of a broken clock—what else might we be getting wrong without realizing it? Maybe the deeper problem is that we can always be deceived. Even our best faculties (sight, memory, reason etc.) can betray us. And if that’s the case, maybe knowledge (at least in the strong, philosophical sense) is impossible. Or if not impossible, impossible to know if and when you have it.

David Hume once said, “A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence.” That strikes me as a sane and honest approach. The question isn’t whether I can be absolutely certain about what I believe, but whether I have good reasons for believing it—and whether I’m open to changing my mind if those reasons fall apart.

Some might find it unsettling—even scandalous—that we can’t achieve a God’s-eye view of the world. But honestly, what’s strange isn’t that we can’t see things with perfect clarity. It’s that we ever thought we should.

Maybe that’s why I find myself leaning toward fallibilism—the view that we can still know things, even while admitting we might be wrong. That kind of knowledge isn’t rigid or absolute, but humble and revisable. And that, to me, feels much closer to the way real life works.

So no, I’m not sure we need to cling too tightly to the word knowledge, at least not in the abstract, capital-K sense. What matters more is the posture we take toward the truth. That we pursue it carefully, honestly, and with a readiness to revise our beliefs when the evidence calls for it.

At least, that’s what I think I know.

 
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals