This old chestnut, again

-Removed-

It is not a case of atheists hijacking the word, it's you mistakenly believing you have a monopoly to it.

-Removed-

But you previously used the word 'object.'

Have you reconsidered your objection?

-Removed-

You don't actually have to believe in these things to accept the possibility of their existence.

-Removed-

Apologies. I didn't know you had such a level.

-Removed-

“ Yes a theist can be a scientist, but it does not logically follow that a scientist can be committed to a spiritual belief. ”

This is a classic case of making a statement without any rationale in support of it. It does not logically follow that a scientist, by virtue of being a scientist, is excluded from a spiritual belief.
I do not think I’m making the same argument as Ghost, I’m not interested in conflating spirituality with psychology or religion, as I’ve mentioned I think the latter is the antithesis of spirituality whilst the former is probably unrelated to it, if it exists at all.

-Removed-

Then... can we not all, atheist and believer alike, consider the spiritual?

-Removed-

But, as I say, it is possible to not hold a belief in these things but to allow that they might nevertheless still exist. I don't currently hold any belief in spirits and souls, but I'm not absolutely certain that I am right. I find value in discussing the subject with others to find their views and the basis for their beliefs, and I accept that their paradigm may more accurately represent reality than my own.

-Removed-

I believe in a spirit 'inside' the body. It makes us who we are. Sometimes there is a disconnect with this spirit, which is where therapies comes in, like mindfulness or CBT. It is religion that seeks to give this spirit an other world dimension.