Classically, Philosophically speaking....

Spirit derives from the Latin Spiritus which has a more corpreal religious connotation, though linguistically of and related to the Greek term Psyche, refering to mind thought consciousness.
The 5 elements.... Earth Wind Water Fire Spirit.

It is 100% Correct to believe in the manifestation of Spirit/Consciousness. Several Great Philosophers and Great Scientist have spoke on the matter of manifestation.

If you are interested Albert Einstein is a quick and easy source.

It is not to speak of entities, but rather collective consciousness.

Most people are only aware of the dogmatic concepts concerning the term Spirit, not the etymology.

A cop out.

Someone who enjoys imbibing spirits?

They don't believe in the religious structures but they still believe in some sort of supernatural or they are so used to their religion that they still feel obligated to be involved in it even if they don't believe anymore..... either way it's nonsense

They haven’t found the right combination of meds yet ....

Spirituality suggests to me an acknowledgement that there is a spirit world or component of the universe. Even perhaps the sense that one feels that not all of what one experiences can be explained in The Handbook Of Chemistry And Physics. Religiosity on the other hand implies an adherence to a spacific set of doctrines and beliefs and a certain amount of zeel twards those tenants. Spirituality occurs to you from your own observation and exprince where religion is usually told to you be others for their own reasons. It has happened that religions have been founded by individuals around spiritual observations they have had. But these inventions are only imparted to others who don't have the benefit of the origin experiences. And, like many human organisations, can become corrupt machanisms of control and abuse. Notice that religions are never democratic. You serrender your individual spiritual experience to join them.

I think it has to do with having to "worship" an entity. The idea that there isnt a "boss" ghost worthy of "worship" doesnt negate the possibility of another plane of existence.

I choose Number 9.
But, I get tired of having to explain that, so I stay away from using the word spiritual.

Dictionary.com
1: of or relating to, or consisting of spirit; incorporeal.

2: of or relating to the spirit or soul, as distinguished from the physical nature:
a spiritual approach to life.

3: closely akin in interests, attitude, outlook, etc.:
the professor's spiritual heir in linguistics.

4: of or relating to spirits or to spiritualists; supernatural or spiritualistic.

5:characterized by or suggesting predominance of the spirit; ethereal or delicately refined:
She is more of a spiritual type than her rowdy brother.

6: of or relating to the spirit as the seat of the moral or religious nature.

7: of or relating to sacred things or matters; religious; devotional; sacred.

8: of or belonging to the church; ecclesiastical:
lords spiritual and temporal.

9: of or relating to the mind or intellect.

Somewhere in my limbic brain, or maybe even underneath my consciousness, there is something that is deeply moved when I hear a tenor lift a soaring aria, or when I see a whale breech, or an eagle glide above the surface of a lake. It is what is moved to action when I see a starving child, or a bullied child. It is, in some way, the thing that connects me to others. I don't attribute it to entities or higher powers.

Spirituality is NOT the same as spiritualism.

Being spiritual simply means that you believe that all things are interconnected and that all things depend upon each other. Think of it as a holistic viewpoint of the universe -- all things either create good or create bad in the universe. Every action has a reaction. No one is an island. We are all responsible for each other. etc.

I think if you ask ten people what they mean by "spiritual," you're likely to get ten different answers. It's a nebulous concept and I think it appeals more to those who tend to eschew labels and definitions. In general, though, I'd say they sort of mean that they have a warm, fuzzy feeling when they think about existence. Beyond that, it might mean that they think/feel all things or life in the universe is connected, that they are in awe of the universe, that they believe in a spiritual realm denuded of religious doctrine, that nature holds some mystical properties, or probably any of dozens of other ideas. It's sort of a "choose your own adventure" of non-doctrinal, quasi-religious belief.

I'm a martial artist, and there's sometimes a lot of spirituality there. Sex is also spiritual, but not in any weird mystical sense. Basically any time you congregate with others and share a mutual love of something, coffee, beer, or whatever, or share a deep understanding of something, or even getting out in nature and appreciating it, that's spirituality. It's something that balances the human psyche, or balances the chemicals in our brain.

I'm very spiritual in many ways, but not religious. As a writer I know the difference between fact and fiction, myth and journalism. I appreciate gods as metaphor and myth, and know that magic isn't real. But to be religious you have to believe specific dogma. The very problem with religion in my opinion is that the religious aren't spiritual at all. Reasonable people are much more spiritual, and humane, than the religious, and more rational than those who are into magical, mystical stuff.

I would describe myself as areligious, not agnostic, because gnostic is "knowing." Gods are, by definition, mythical, so to not know if a god exists would be like not knowing if Santa Claus is real. I don't even use athiest to describe myself, as that's a political term, meaning one who does not believe in the official religion of a state. Here in the US, we're officially areligious.

I would tend to agree with the convenience angle in many cases. Though, to expand slightly, spirituality is concerned with your relationship with yourself, rather than with an external deity (the base tenet of religion).

The most common place to see that statement is on a dating site. I felt it meant they were uncomfortable saying they were agnostic or atheist.

For me it is a reverance for the simultaneous simplicity and complexity of nature. No gods, no spirits, just and appeciation of the Natural Law and relationships in nature.

For me spiritual means I believe there is a higher "part" to my being, specifically the part that can choose to do things that my body/brain does not, higher thought, and by aplication of such thought, override the phisical me where I see appropriate. Not religious means for me that I don't/cannot recognise any "Gods" as higher beings and so do not recognise the doctrines attributed to their name or their envoys. Having said that, even the greatest fool has some speck of wisdom learned in their life, so old writings are not to be totally dismissed.

Maybe its the word spirit that we are misdefining? sometimes I use it as a description of my essence beyond my physical body. Or is it the thought that our "spirit" lives on in our descendants meaning our memory?

I used to use this phrase to mean that I wasn't sure what I believed, but it wasn't found in organized religion. Like "Higher Power" stuff. After some critical thinking on it, I just realized I was kidding myself and since I didn't really believe in a god, I'm an atheist. It took a little longer to lose concepts like ghosts and demons, but I got there eventually.

It most likely means that they don't believe in organized religion, but do believe there is a God or a soul etc.

Yes. spiritual has nothing to do with spiritualism, just as naturalist has nothing to do with naturist, though the two are not mutually exclusive. In fact the second two sound like quite fun together, but I would leave the first two if I was You.

From a cultural standpoint, I think it is safe harbor for someone on the way to agnosticism, reject all religion, but haven’t come to terms with reasons why

There is book on the subject " A little book of atheist spirituality".
I bought it on Amazon for 1c. iirc (plus p&p).
The author is French so it is a little like reading granite, but it does offer some insight.

My understanding (rather sure there are a host of different definitions) is both "religious" and "spiritual" people have a false perspective of reality as they both accept faith (belief without evidence) based assertions as facts (things that can be demonstrated) Religious (my definition) implies, in addition to faith, an adherence to the dogma of an organized religion.

Each evolves at their own pace, no two paths are the same.
This is part of my path, rabbit hole, I've been down.
Good luck in your pursuit of knowledge.

To me it is a way to state tournament are different than any label