Yes. "Spiritual" can be alternatively construed in non-occult ways. Of pertaining to conceptual affairs (including the common fact of one's life being coordinated under ideas / plans / systems which transcend one's personal interests or selfishness). Of referring to new life directions resulting from novel, intoxicating, extreme, and even horrible experiences -- and feelings like wonder from beauty, grandness, etc. Of pointing to the functions of "sacredness" in unifying a group of people (expressing respect for certain conventions and reverence for culturally important items and historical events / sacrifices); and denoting deference, adherence to principles of a chosen practice / path. And so forth. On the other foot: The usage or significance of "materialism" itself can often be ambiguous in a conversation or discussion. In an everyday sense it refers to passion for wealth and material possessions or a lifestyle and construct of personal meaning centered around such. In a philosophical sense it refers to a metaphysical / ontological belief in a matter monism. Since "matter" is a generalization, it's yet another abstract invention (summarizing "substance") treated as more real in an underlying or overarching way than immediate perceptual encounters with particular phenomena. In a methodological context it's an explanatory approach that focuses on the mechanistic interactions and relationships of objects in space. In philosophy of mind, it points to a set of approaches (eliminativism, functionalism, identity theory, etc), or those as modifiers which designate sub-species of metaphysical, method, physiological materialism that have application in PoM. In the contemporary era, non-everyday "materialism" is argued to be better replaced by "physicalism", especially since that potentially standardizes the meaning of "matter" as something defined by or delegated to physics. However, there are issues arising from lack of consensus about the nature of that concept as well. Johnny-Dee: I like your way of characterizing physicalism. Unfortunately, physicalists themselves have a hard time coming up with a definition of physicalism. When I attended Bowling Green University's conference on physicalism this past spring, the speakers couldn't agree on what "physicalism" was. The best definitions were "negative" (e.g., physicalism is not dualism). Many of the papers that didn't want to get entangled in the definition debate would say things like, "we can't agree on a philosophical definition of physicalism, but we all know what we mean by it." I thought it was very humorous. Although, I agreed with Sara Worley's definition of physicalism as non-teleological. She seemd unconcerned that her conception of physicalism seems self-refuting along the lines that have been sketched by Norman Malcolm, William Hasker, and yourself. --comment posted on Victor Reppert's blog "Dangerous Idea", Nov 2, 2005; entry titled "On The Concept Of Physicalism"