The Nomothete LLC

We live in a time where almost everyone claims to value spirituality.

People say they are spiritual but not religious. They speak of energy, awakening, consciousness, intuition, signs, synchronicities, shadow work, healing, purpose, and transcendence.

And I understand why.

Human beings are not machines. We are meaning-making creatures. We suffer, we search, we grieve, we wonder, we question reality, and somewhere in the middle of all that pain and possibility, we reach toward something greater than ourselves.

But the deeper question is this:

When we say “spirituality,” what are we actually talking about?

That is the problem explored in the paper Concepts and Misconceptions in the Scientific Study of Spirituality. The authors argue that spirituality has become one of the most popular but least clearly defined words in modern psychology, sociology, theology, and culture.

And that matters.

Because if we cannot define spirituality clearly, we cannot study it clearly. If we cannot study it clearly, we cannot measure it responsibly. And if we cannot measure it responsibly, we risk confusing deep human transformation with unusual perception, emotional intensity, or altered states of consciousness.

That does not mean spirituality is false.

It means spirituality requires discernment.

The modern problem with spirituality

One of the strongest ideas in the paper is that spirituality is often treated as something universal, private, positive, and separate from religion.

In modern culture, religion is often associated with institutions, doctrine, authority, ritual, and tradition. Spirituality is often associated with personal experience, inner truth, freedom, transcendence, and meaning.

That split makes sense emotionally.

Many people have been harmed by religious institutions. Many people distrust systems that claim authority over the soul. Many people want connection without control, meaning without dogma, and healing without shame.

But the paper challenges us to slow down.

The authors explain that the separation between “religious” and “spiritual” is not as clean as many people assume. In fact, research cited in the paper found a large overlap between people who identify as religious and people who identify as spiritual. Many traditionally religious people also experience spirituality through their faith, community, ritual, prayer, service, and moral formation.

That means spirituality is not automatically deeper than religion.

And religion is not automatically empty because it has structure.

This is where we need intellectual honesty.

A person can be spiritual and confused. A person can be religious and deeply transformed. A person can reject institutions and still inherit ideas from them. A person can have unusual experiences and still need grounding, wisdom, community, and self-examination.

Spirituality is not just an experience

One of the most important warnings in the paper is that modern spirituality is often reduced to subjective experience.

In other words, if I feel something powerful, mysterious, or transcendent, I may call it spiritual.

But feelings alone are not enough.

A spiritual experience can be meaningful, but it can also be misinterpreted. A powerful inner moment may come from grief, trauma, awe, meditation, imagination, altered consciousness, emotional intensity, neurological sensitivity, or genuine religious devotion.

The experience itself does not automatically tell us what it means.

That is why many religious traditions developed systems of discernment. They did not simply accept every vision, voice, feeling, or mystical state as divine truth. They tested experiences through ethics, community, humility, tradition, reason, and long-term transformation.

That is wisdom.

In my own language: not every shift in perception is revelation.

Sometimes it is insight. Sometimes it is imagination. Sometimes it is trauma speaking in symbolic form. Sometimes it is the nervous system searching for safety. Sometimes it is the mind trying to create meaning from chaos. Sometimes it may be spiritual. But it still must be tested by reality, responsibility, and the fruit it produces in a person’s life.

What are spirituality scales really measuring?

The most provocative part of the paper is its critique of scientific spirituality measurements.

The authors argue that many spirituality scales may not be measuring a universal spiritual essence. Instead, they may be measuring a person’s tendency toward unusual perceptions, altered states of consciousness, paranormal belief, magical thinking, absorption, and non-ordinary experiences.

That is a serious distinction.

It does not mean people who report spiritual experiences are “crazy.” It does not mean spirituality is pathology. It does not mean science has disproven the sacred.

But it does mean we need to be careful.

A person who is highly open to unusual experiences may score high on spirituality scales. But that does not automatically mean they are wiser, more ethical, more healed, more grounded, or more spiritually mature.

Spiritual sensitivity is not the same as spiritual integration.

That distinction matters for mental health.

Because if we glorify every unusual perception as spiritual, we may accidentally neglect trauma, psychosis, dissociation, emotional dysregulation, substance use, grief, attachment wounds, or neurological sensitivity.

But if we dismiss every unusual perception as illness, we may strip people of meaning, dignity, culture, and the symbolic language they use to survive.

The better path is not blind belief or cold dismissal.

The better path is discernment.

Spirituality must be grounded in the whole person

The paper argues that spiritual experiences do not happen in a vacuum. They are shaped by history, culture, belief systems, community, personality, biology, family, environment, and social context.

That is exactly where modern spirituality often becomes too shallow.

When spirituality becomes only “my personal experience,” it can lose the depth that comes from tradition, accountability, discipline, community, and ethical responsibility.

Real spirituality should not only ask:

“What did I experience?”

It should also ask:

“What does this experience do to my character?” “Does it make me more compassionate?” “Does it make me more honest?” “Does it help me face reality or escape it?” “Does it connect me to others or isolate me inside my own certainty?” “Does it help me become more responsible for my life?” “Does it reduce harm?” “Does it deepen wisdom?”

Because an experience can feel transcendent and still produce arrogance.

An experience can feel powerful and still disconnect a person from reality.

An experience can feel sacred and still become self-centered.

That is why spirituality without humility can become delusion. Spirituality without ethics can become manipulation. Spirituality without science can become fantasy. Spirituality without psychology can become avoidance. Spirituality without community can become isolation. Spirituality without discernment can become confusion.

A better way forward

I do not believe we should throw spirituality away.

I believe we should mature it.

We need a spirituality strong enough to sit at the same table with psychology, neuroscience, philosophy, sociology, theology, and lived experience.

We need a spirituality that can say:

“I had an experience, but I still need to interpret it carefully.”

“I feel something deeply, but feeling is not the same as proof.”

“My perception matters, but perception can be shaped by trauma, biology, culture, and emotion.”

“My inner world is meaningful, but it must still be tested against reality.”

That is not an attack on spirituality.

That is respect for it.

Because anything powerful enough to shape a person’s life should be handled with care.

In mental health, this is especially important. Many people experience visions, voices, synchronicities, dreams, altered states, deep intuition, symbolic thinking, and intense meaning-making. For some, these experiences become destructive. For others, when grounded properly, they become part of healing, creativity, identity, and transformation.

The difference is not always the experience itself.

The difference is the framework around it.

Support matters. Context matters. Community matters. Clinical wisdom matters. Cultural humility matters. Personal responsibility matters. Discernment matters.

The Nomothete view

My own view is this:

Spirituality is not merely the ability to experience something unusual.

Spirituality is the disciplined process of transforming experience into wisdom.

It is not just transcendence. It is integration.

It is not just escaping the self. It is becoming more honest with the self.

It is not just seeing signs. It is learning how to live with more clarity, compassion, and responsibility.

It is not just questioning reality. It is also questioning your interpretation of reality.

That is where science, philosophy, psychology, and spirituality can meet.

Science asks: What can be tested? Psychology asks: What is happening in the mind and nervous system? Philosophy asks: What does this mean? Spirituality asks: How should this transform the way I live?

When those questions work together, spirituality becomes more than a vague feeling.

It becomes a path of becoming.

Final thought

The paper does not destroy spirituality. It challenges lazy spirituality.

It asks us to stop using spiritual language as if it automatically explains everything. It asks researchers to define their terms better. It asks spiritual people to practice discernment. It asks all of us to recognize that human experience is complex, layered, biological, cultural, psychological, and meaningful at the same time.

That is the kind of spirituality I believe the modern world needs.

Not spirituality that runs away from science. Not science that mocks meaning. Not religion emptied of experience. Not experience emptied of structure.

But a mature, grounded, honest spirituality.

One that helps people become more whole.

Always remember to question reality.

And at every end, there is a beginning.

Question for reflection: When you say something is “spiritual,” are you describing the experience itself — or the wisdom, responsibility, and transformation that came after it?