I have never understood what "spiritual" meant. I have only ever been called it as a sort of close second to being religious. "You don't believe in god? Oh, dear, but are you a SPIRITUAL person?", as if that would almost be ok. When I've asked what they mean by spiritual, they struggle to explain. My answer now would be, "No, I don't believe in anything supernatural". Any other suggestions of a suitable answer?

I am unequivocally atheist, but I'll use a whisper of "spiritual" to describe myself.
I'm not arrogant enough to think that I understand everything, know everything, have a solution to every conundrum.

There are things in the universe far beyond what any human can grasp -- even Neil deGrasse Tyson There are things in the universe bigger than humans. I don't know what they are, but I will not say that we are all there is.

"Spiritual" means different things to different people. Often, a person's vocabulary is insufficient or the vocabulary just doesn't exist to describe an idea or feeling accuratesly. Whenit comes to etherial matters vocabulary is pretty limited. If "fpiritual" is th eclosest they can come to describing what ehy feel and believe that is fine with me.

I've never heard of persons who are self described as "spiritual" starting a way or killing people in the name of their beliefs. If I am going to expend efforts on on opposing religious persons I would focus on the fanatics who will do harm to others.

I have been an atheist since I was a kid. However. I was for a long time confused and on the fence about the subject of spirituality because it was such a widespread, accepted concept. Then I read an article by American philosopher, John Searle, Professor Emeritus at UC Berkeley on the subject of duality. Duality is the concept that people have both a spiritual side and a physical side and that the spiritual controls the physical. His big problem with that idea is that you can assign or imagine any qualities you want to spirituality, but in the physical world, your physical body would have to have an interface to be controlled by any other entity just as a car would have to have an interface to steer or control it's speed and stopping. There is no such interface in the human body which disproved spirituality for him and me as well. I recommend reading John Searle on topics such duality, philosophy of mind, thought experiments. artificial intelligence, and consciousness.

It depends on the context the human spirit is not a theist thing, Rather a view of our humanness.

There is a movement to circumvent words with a religious inference. It is similar to a movement, still ongoing, to de-paternalize the vocabulary. There are other words and since words can matter, it is well worth the effort. Besides it can be a fun brain game.

I did this poll then read others comment, which inspired me to look up the definition of spiritual. Those that say an atheist should not use the word to describe any thing but religion are right since we do not believe in gods or the existence of an eternal soul. I have got to find a new word wonder, humble insignificance, amazement and awe that a walk in a pristine old growth forest makes me feel; feelings that have nothing to do with gods, souls or beliefs.

I've had someone explain to me spirituality is just striving to live up to your moral values. I wouldn't never call myself spiritual because it would just confuse people with the traditional definition.

I’m not sure why an explanation is needed, because it’s quite personal. But it did make me think, so I appreciate that. I consider myself to be spiritual, but I don’t believe in any supernatural dieties. But when I stand next to a river or listen to a thunderstorm and experience the power of nature, I feel very connected to the world in a way that is difficult to explain other than a spiritual experience. I don’t connect it with god. I feel it in my heart and soul. It’s peaceful.

In other contents I think the word 'mindful' is better than spiritual when explaining the connection one can feel with nature.

I voted "it depends." I am quite ambivalent about the word. I agree that it is abused, that it acts in many cases as an apology to believers, that it is in some ways a word without content that could be more accurately represented. That said, the denial of the experience of "the realm of the spirit" (awe, love, serenity, bliss, etc.) would come across as harshly materialist to pagan and Wiccan friends of mine. Once I know a person and s/he knows me, I rarely use the word because I don't like it, and I certainly don't believe in the supernatural - but if I'm talking to a pagan or Wiccan for the first time and trying to describe myself, then I will often say that I'm "a spiritually-open atheist" because otherwise they won't have any grasp of how I work. This is important because, despite our differences, I see pagans as our natural allies against Christian hegemony in this country - and because I simply have found some really wonderful people in their ranks. Of course, I can only connect well with those pagans who consider most of what they are doing to be metaphorical expressions of internal experiences.

I think most people say spiritual as a figure of speech; just something you say while growing up.

I don't even know what it means.