Dawkins' new book

[SYZ]

...Can you list a few of the other gods you think may  possibly exist?

...So no, I won't give you a list of gods and my views on them. You either understand my point or you don't.

LOL... you can't list them because there are none.  (Sorry for calling your bluff mate.)

[SYZ]

To claim one KNOWS there are no leprechauns, or god,  without proof is a classic argument  from ignorance...

Philosophically of course this is correct. But... here we're talking in abstract terms of gods and leprechauns,
not something falsifiable such as global warming.

By implication, can I assume then you're agnostic about the existence of leprechauns? Yes?  No?

[Thumpalumpacus]

...Can you list a few of the other gods you think may  possibly exist?

...So no, I won't give you a list of gods and my views on them. You either understand my point or you don't.

LOL... you can't list them because there are none.  (Sorry for calling your bluff mate.)

I'll take "unable to think conjecturally", Alex. Someone clearly has never heard the term "for the sake of discussion" ... and I'm certainly not going to help you out. You'll need to learn that sort of thinking on your own.

Put another way, you're assuming your premise, not demonstrating it. There's a phrase for that ... let's see if you can figure it out. Let me know if you need help.

[skyking]

Functionally, I am an atheist. I have no need to read books about a journey I never took, one from belief to disbelief.
I have always been "there". Some folks find stories about those trips interesting, and other folks profit from it.

[grympy]

To claim one KNOWS there are no leprechauns, or god,  without proof is a classic argument  from ignorance...

Philosophically of course this is correct.  But... here we're talking in abstract terms of gods and leprechauns,
not something falsifiable such as global warming.

By implication, can I assume then you're agnostic about the existence of leprechauns?  Yes?  No?

 Yes, of course. But I suspect there may be some  long removed grain of truth in the myth of Leprechauns. I'd like to think so. 

I'm also agnostic  about dragons.   I disbelieve, and go so far as to say I'm almost certain  dragons don't  exist; but I can't prove it. Therefore ,agnostic about dragons .

A skeptic, I avoid truth statements  as much a possible. Imo we actually a  'know' very little in life. 
Having said that, an observer would probably not be able to tell any of my philosophical positions  by watching my behaviour on a daily basis. 

These are metaphysical  matters, and  form part our inner life.

[Bucky Ball]

Protagoras, a 5th Century BCE Greek wrote "Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not or of what sort they may be. Many things prevent knowledge including the obscurity of the subject and the brevity of human life" The concept of agnosticism has been around for a long time. Classical agnosticism was that it is not possible to know if there was a god.

"According to philosopher William L. Rowe, in this strict sense, agnosticism is the view that human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify either the belief that God exists or the belief that God does not exist."

It never meant simply "I do not know ... "

[Cheerful Charlie]

To claim one KNOWS there are no leprechauns, or god,  without proof is a classic argument  from ignorance...

Philosophically of course this is correct.  But... here we're talking in abstract terms of gods and leprechauns,
not something falsifiable such as global warming.

By implication, can I assume then you're agnostic about the existence of leprechauns?  Yes?  No?

 Yes, of course. But I suspect there may be some  long removed grain of truth in the myth of Leprechauns. I'd like to think so. 

I'm also agnostic  about dragons.   I disbelieve, and go so far as to say I'm almost certain  dragons don't  exist; but I can't prove it. Therefore ,agnostic about dragons .

A skeptic, I avoid truth statements  as much a possible. Imo we actually a  'know' very little in life. 
Having said that, an observer would probably not be able to tell any of my philosophical positions  by watching my behaviour on a daily basis. 

These are metaphysical  matters, and  form part our inner life.

Charles Bonnet Syndrome.  People losing their eyesight from cataracts or some such often suffer visual hallucinations.  Hallucinations of very small humanoids is very common.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2000...technology

...
We can readily imagine the effect of CBS visions on the experiencer, especially in a less scientific age. An old person with failing eyesight living in isolation might very well start to see colourful little figures, perhaps wearing outlandish clothes. These little people would be amusing and magical, visible but not quite solid, with a tendency to van ish if you blinked or took your eye off them. Fairies and pixies, leprechauns and their kind may not be myths at all. They may be visitors from that most wondrous of mystical realms, the hidden kingdom of the human mind.
...

[ghostexorcist]

Here is a brief critique of one small section of the book by an Assyriologist on twitter:

https://twitter.com/GHeathWhyte/status/1...7943997440

[grympy]

Philosophically of course this is correct.  But... here we're talking in abstract terms of gods and leprechauns,
not something falsifiable such as global warming.

By implication, can I assume then you're agnostic about the existence of leprechauns?  Yes?  No?

 Yes, of course. But I suspect there may be some  long removed grain of truth in the myth of Leprechauns. I'd like to think so. 

I'm also agnostic  about dragons.   I disbelieve, and go so far as to say I'm almost certain  dragons don't  exist; but I can't prove it. Therefore ,agnostic about dragons .

A skeptic, I avoid truth statements  as much a possible. Imo we actually a  'know' very little in life. 
Having said that, an observer would probably not be able to tell any of my philosophical positions  by watching my behaviour on a daily basis. 

These are metaphysical  matters, and  form part our inner life.

Charles Bonnet Syndrome.  People losing their eyesight from cataracts or some such often suffer visual hallucinations.  Hallucinations of very small humanoids is very common.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2000...technology

...
We can readily imagine the effect of CBS visions on the experiencer, especially in a less scientific age. An old person with failing eyesight living in isolation might very well start to see colourful little figures, perhaps wearing outlandish clothes. These little people would be amusing and magical, visible but not quite solid, with a tendency to van ish if you blinked or took your eye off them. Fairies and pixies, leprechauns and their kind may not be myths at all. They may be visitors from that most wondrous of mystical realms, the hidden kingdom of the human mind.
...

 Wow.Thanks for that I learned.

[mordant]

Protagoras, a 5th Century BCE Greek wrote "Concerning the gods, I have no means of knowing whether they exist or not or of what sort they may be. Many things prevent knowledge including the obscurity of the subject and the brevity of human life" The concept of agnosticism has been around for a long time. Classical agnosticism was that it is not possible to know if there was a god.

"According to philosopher William L. Rowe, in this strict sense, agnosticism is the view that human reason is incapable of providing sufficient rational grounds to justify either the belief that God exists or the belief that God does not exist."

It never meant simply "I do not know ... "

Yes, but it is not just some inability in human reason, so much as it's just an inherent impossibility to evaluate supernatural beings and realms -- because their existence is something we have zero access to, as they're hypothesized to exist outside of nature. There's nothing to even discuss, no knowledge to be HAD. If that's an inability in humans, it's less about our reasoning ability than it is about our inability to step outside of reality to view it from the outside. And since there probably isn't anything "outside" to begin with, that's not even a matter of human impotence, but just the reality of how things are.