Good point. The word is not very clear, but can be taken to mean a bunch of things to do with life, death, existence beyond the natural, and so on.

I don't believe in things "beyond the natural", having never encountered any. But I am concerned about matters of life and death, morality, meaning, etc. I just consider them to be real things, not imaginary ones.

Does that mean you believe in an evidence-based world? Because that would likely be a purely materialistic one, since the physical world is what we can gather evidence on.

@Denker Our definitions of "materialistic" are VERY different.

Spirituality was defined by CG Jung as “having to do with the numinous”, but I’d include belief in a soul, karma, an afterlife, enlightenment, a spiritual dimension to life (as per Descartes’ dualism). I hope that clarifies things.

@Denker -- Yes, it does, and thank you. Now I am able to answer.

To the first question regarding the relationship between my atheism and materialism I can only say that I use the definition of the word 'materialism' as being that of worldview. That is, the notion that everything that exists is made up of matter. I say that in this sense, atheism as I define it has nothing to do with materialism specifically. As a scientist, materialism is problematic, but acceptable. My not believing in the supernatural on any level has little to do with how I view the world other than to say that anything lying outside the range of objective reality is unacceptable until evidence exists to support it.

About atheism and its compatibility with your definition of spirituality, absolutely not, and here is why: Ruling out one form of supernatural while not discarding the rest is inconsistent. I do not believe in any form of deity, nor do I accept the existence of leprechauns, angels, ghosts, etc. That also rules out irrational thinking such as astrology, Ouija, and the plethora of superstitions.

My worldview is largely informed by evidentialism.