Hijacking a shit thread for some real talk:
There is another way besides the fedorian disregard of anything not scientifically verifiable and the credulous obsessions of belief. Both are flip sides of literalism, which is truly mundane. The alternative is a metaphorical and analogical perspective, which doesn't seek necessarily to drop things into the categories of is and isn't, but seeks to understand relation. It is different than solipsism, which says that one can only know of their own existence; it seeks to understand how and in what way things exist.
This perspective can begin to be understood by considering how we perceive the world. Consider an "object" such as a pencil. Does the pencil exist? We perceive it to be such, having hard divisions from everything else that isn't the particular pencil, but this distinction is entirely mental. Examined on the microscopic level using the model of physics, the distinction breaks down to meaningless. On the cosmological scale the distinction between a pencil and the rest of Earth is arbitrary and infinitesimally small.
The pencil, and our model of what it is and how it behaves, is entirely a mental construct. Is it useful? Very, but "usefulness" itself is entirely subjective and situational; we encounter the same problem.
We don't experience raw sense-data, when we perceive overlaid is something akin to "augmented reality," complexly colored with valuation, relationships, categorization and memory.
What of minds, and one's own self-perception? What you are is a narrative construct; a story you tell yourself about yourself. You are essentially a thoughtform, a tulpa. "You" exist no more objectively than any character you imagine in your mind, or other people whose behavior, emotion, and experience you model in your mind. Gods, daemons, fictional characters, and every other narrative entity exist, it's just a matter of knowing how they exist: within brains. The materialist would claim that this is an "illusion," but if it were, it would mean that everything is such.
One can act on such knowledge by engaging in an interplay between suspension of disbelief and suspension of belief. Narrative experience shouldn't be a tightly bound and mostly fixed (or at least slow to change) state of affairs. it should dance and play, to alternate between believing in everything and nothing at all. The point of all this is to act as narrative fuel for self-creation, which is the most profound art and the essence of magic.