It certainly makes a smoother transition. I went that route, seeking to find the nuggets of beauty and truth in the things that others believe. Slowly, over the years, all the while identifying as an "eclectic spiritualist", I settled on being agnostic, while appreciating what others believe, as long as it improves their lives and makes them better people.

With spirituality they don't usually claim they know "the truth", and thus have a more live and let live attitude. I think it is less harmful, if harmful at all.

Well, I could be flippant and say as long as no one gets hurt and there's no property damage it's all good. In seriousness, if someone has a mindset/spirituality/whatever that works for them and it doesn't impinge on other people, then I don't see that there is a problem. Whatever brings you home to port, sailor.

Humans have emotions. Science doesn't deny that. Downwardly spiraling emotions can destroy us, or at least destroy the quality of our life experience. Science doesn’t deny that. Certain habits or disciplines can improve our emotional state. Science doesn’t deny that.

I claim that the original impulse to religious behavior was, and still is, at its deepest essence, simply an attempt to codify a practice that lifts human attitude and mood out of dysfunctional paralysis.

Every human institution is susceptible to corruption, but it does not make sense to me, for example, to campaign for the total abandonment of government simply because our government is rife with corruption. Efforts toward reform will always be required, but some semblance of order is better than total chaos.

Likewise with religion. Having mood-lifting practices led by institutions is probably more effective than leaving everyone to their own chaotic and ill-conceived devices, but massive reform of those institutions will be necessary, and they are among the most resistant to reform.

To me spirit is just mood or attitude. Religion is just whatever practice you use to keep that mood healthy. Don’t like those words? Use different ones. But humans are emotional creatures in need of constant mood management.
Science doesn’t deny that.

When someone says “I’m spiritual but not religious” what I hear is “I’m emotional but not disciplined”.

My response is “Best of luck with that”.

If they are praying to something its the same.

I'm good with HARMLESS spirituality. That is to say, you do not use it to push agendas that are not based in reality, you do not rely on it in place of medicine for your children, etc.
Unfortunately, there is a great deal of harm to be had in believing that crystals will heal your children, that science is an enemy of the natural order, etc. That is where the problems enter into things.
If you like to take a walk in the woods to connect with the spirits, go for it. If you take your children out of school so they can commune with nature, please reconsider.

I'm on the fence here, because on the one hand there's less dogma in being spiritual without religion, which I think is good, but on the other hand I think there's more openness to a lot of unsubstantiated claims on a broader scale (i.e., the epitome of "so open minded that your brain falls out" ). I tend to think it's a net gain, but marginally so.

It seems we all have different beliefs. I believe energy does not end at death. That is the part that I believe continues on after death with some semblance of our being embedded in it. If you believe that is a relic of religion, so be it--I don't. If you believe all of the "me" ends at death, so be it--I don't. If you believe spirituality is emotions, so be it--I don't. Any of these might happen. However, I think the biggest joke is that we spend so much time discussing proof for the nonexistence of god or looking for definitive responses about what comes after death when we could be going on with the life we have and making it the best for ourselves and those we come in contact with.

Here's hoping we can accept differences of opinion while alive better than many of those who have led our and other countries for millenium.

I know I'll probably get some pushback on this, but I really don't believe that being "spiritual" is any different that believing in gods and religion.
It's just putting a different name on it to make oneself feel better about it.
Fine, if that's what someone wants to do, I just don't buy it.

I've wondered about the meaning of "spiritual", what do people mean when they say they are spiritual? Is it a deep seated reluctance to move away from their early life experience? Human existence is filled with serendipitous events that are beyond explanation. I include these in my meaning of being a humanist. There is a part of life that goes beyond the simply physical world, yet doesn't prove or disprove a supernatural being.

To my way of thinking a "spiritual person" is either a sucker or a con artist.

I'm sure religion will grow out of modern spirituality, they are already beginning to pick soft leaders like Nassim Haramein and Deepak Chopra.

A rose by any other name is still a rose.

I used to be in this category of spiritual but not religious. I don't think it's near as destructive as the dogmatism of major faiths, but I still bought crystals and incense and books. So I'd call it a step forward on a large scale, but probably not so much of a good thing for an individual.

I think it's definitely a step in the right direction.

There are so many extreme or even moderate beliefs out there that make spirituality look mild by comparison that it's not much of a stretch to drop it altogether.

Spirituality without religion is possible but it is not differ from religion. Religion do believe in supernatural entity and spirituality is nothing but a product of religion. In premitive time human did not have religion but believed that there is someone who is controlling the natural powers. They were spiritual and they gave birth to the religion through spirituality.

I don't think spirituality is the answer. I think the vague notions that come along with spirituality can lead to individuals accepting other ideas with vague explanations, which can lead to real harm. Examples would be homeopathy, crystal healing, alkaline water, etc. The belief in these ideas can interfere with people getting the medical help they need, and occasionally cause direct harm through improper production, for example not actually diluting the ingredients in a homeopathic remedy.

i have no clue what a former believer needs in terms of crutches or rest-belief or whatever. i was born a heathen & always happy to be that. my spirituality originated in not-knowing what i saw & sensed a few times - call it entities, ghosts, spirits, i DON'T KNOW. energy seemingly doesn't get lost with death, & if i am keenly observant i can sense the state of being in someone else without the help of actions or words. i have no belief whatsoever, & some things i simply do not know. that is my spirituality.

I am the oddball again, by saying I am spiritual sided. Like when I bring up Nationaism being worst than Religion.

Spiritual is simply the 99 percent unknowns.!. Util it's manifest into our ego self. Sure enough we live in an over ego world. Religion is not spiritual because it is a broken parrot repeating ancient myths and legends that are not good enough for scientific or reasonably connecting. Rather a divider than all things connected

Well, actually I consider myself to be spiritual in a sense. Realistically I still need facts to back things up, and of course I have no hard facts to back up my belief. I actually didn't have this as an open question until something that happened to me multiple times over several years.

Many years ago, something happened to me that I couldn't explain. I passed it off as just a coincidence. That something came about when my Aunt passed away. She appeared to me in a dream and we had a rather lengthy conversation. She told me she had passed, but not to worry and to make sure to take care of family. She would be watching over us she told me and that she loved all of us. I found out the next day that she had indeed passed. Now as I said, I passed that off as coincidence. And like I know many of you will say, it was just a dream and it does not mean anything. You are all probably right.

If it did not happen to me in similar fashion over multiple years then I still probably would dismiss it. Each case was a family member and each time I somehow knew in advance they had each passed. I can't explain why and perhaps it is all just delusional. I don't know. I won't try to pass it off as something everyone should believe or have hope over. I don't even feel the need to believe. I only have it as an open question to which I still have no answer, and only based on my own experiences.

One other thing, I only brought this out because you asked the question. The idea does not change my outlook on life or give me a reason to believe that there is life after death. There probably is still a valid explanation that does not involve something superstitious. But until I can answer the question as to how I knew the things I knew in advance, I have to leave it as an open question and keep searching for the answer.

There are a few people I have run across that called themselves spiritual and they have taken steps away from organized religion, and that is a good thing in itself. It also appeared to be a starting point to thinking about their stance on religion and I encourage that. If that is the path they need to take towards science and reason then so be it. Not everyone turns the light switch on and has an epiphany, for some it is a journey, and we should help them take the next steps along the way. This is just for a handful of the many "spiritual" people, because not all that say, "I am spiritual" are ready, willing and able to start to evaluate their position. That said, there are those that are just looking to replace their old religion with an updated modern shiny version of "spirituality"....

I understand what you are saying, but I totally avoid use of the word "spiritual", as I do not believe that human beings have a spirit. Movements to be more in tune with nature and to be more caring and ethica;.

The cure to religion is another religion. Nothing is sacred, the spiritual create another sickness in the cesspool. Science does not apply to the untestable.

NO.
Not all things spiritual are "religious" any more than doing meditation is being religious. I think many atheists I've encountered on this website are knee-jerk reacting to their former beliefs by tossing out everything, even valid things, denying we are really made of energy.

They don't seem to realize that time and space don't actually exist, except in our minds.

Not really.

Call your fictional narratives by another name and with slightly different emperor's clothing and they're still the same bullshit underneath.

Maybe with less pedophilia than the Catholic Church, but ultimately only science has any credibility of Truth.