Finally I find someone I can speak my mind to around here that won't be offended. Those Chihuahuas are vicious I'd watch out for their sharp teeth. Although I think a cat would be a more apropos for this situation . I hate separating conversations in quotes I hope you don't mind.

So we agree that science is limited yes? In the same way that science is limited in telling us about our dreams, it is also limited in explaining spirits and the occult. That's the point I'm trying to make. So we will never be able to "measure" a ghost. After my mother passed away from a terrible death my house was alive. I would have never told you ghosts were real. Armed with these experiences I asked around. These experiences are far more common then one would initially believe. That's because these individuals fear talking about their experiences because generally they are treated like they are crazy when they talk about them. This is something that's very wrong about our culture, when people's beliefs are criticized to the point where they don't even want to talk about them. I'm not accusing you of going that far but it gets very tiring having to constantly defend them.

Anyone who has a modicum of experience in the occult will tell you that our beliefs have a massive impact in how we experience the occult. Not having beliefs gives us a more pure experience. If one approaches the demonic expecting to see a hell spawn then that's what you generally will find. When I look at the world I see a thousand shades of grey. Nothing is so black and white anymore. And Crowley's quote I assume touches on this. His rituals and experiments may seem like one giant hoax to you but unless you actually successfully completed one of them then there's no way you can be 100% assured they are bs or not.

As per my online dictionary copy and paste the whole point of that was to show you that words have multiple meanings (especially this word). I highlighted the part that very much so goes against your limited definition of it.

Also in ancient Greek, "departed soul, spirit, ghost," and often represented symbolically as a butterfly or moth. The word had extensive sense development in Platonic philosophy and Jewish-influenced theological writing of St. Paul (compare spirit (n.)). Meaning "human soul" is from 1650s. In English, psychological sense "mind," is attested by 1910.
Plato's tripartite theory of the soul also greatly expands on your limited definition. You know Plato was a well known ancient Greek philosopher right . In fact some even call him the father of philosophy.

Energy manipulation of chi/ki/prana is step one and the least interesting part of it but I'm happy that you at least acknowledge it. But I didn't get into the occult to play around with energy in my body, I got into it to experience the "impossible". Whether your etymology definition of the word spiritualist holds true with many people on this forum doesn't take away from the validity of the definition. This isn't necessarily a forum where you will find many traditional spiritualists. That being said, a lot of people think spirituality is just one big giant group hug where you dance around and take a lot of drugs and sing kumbaya. Nothing could be further from the truth. A more modern definition of the word that you just might agree with, perhaps spirituality is just human's attempt to understand the intangible incommensurable parts of the human psyche science can't identify yet.

We don't have a damn clue what the imagination truly is. Most people barely even dig into the tip of that endless iceburg

This is a bit of a tangent, but your comment made me think of this:

There's a newly described condition called Aphantasia, in which people seem to have no minds-eye, or imagination. Here's a BBC article on it.

Blessings
~ND

As much or as little as you damn well please

How heavy a single experience sits in the total sum of experiences for the individual depends upon how important the individual deems that experience.

For example:

Many years ago now, I was relaxing in my mothers backyard enjoying a cigarette and listening the symphony of native birds sing the sun away over the horizon. I cannot for the life of me recall the details of what was going through my head at the time. This wasn't a terribly profound happenstance, quite ordinary actually. When a money spider crawled along my finger, I'm not sure if you get money spiders outside of Australia. They are under 2mm in size and are translucent red and the myth is that when you see a money spider it is a sign of forthcoming fortune etc. Anyway, this little guy was doing his/her/it's thing along my finger, all the while I was completely transfixed by the scene. I was hypnotised, this was the most important thing that had happened to me to date, or so I though.
Every time since then, when I see a spider (it doesn't matter about the colour) that scene plays out in my head. Because at the time I attributed so much weight to the memory.

Needless to say the myth was, as some of you might have guessed, just a myth.
Fun though. Messing with your imagination/memory bank.

Anyway, the stories we tell ourselves about the true nature of reality/realness are ours and ours alone. If you can find a suitable language with which to express your story to others, and they don't mind. Then you do you boo.

Fascinating, thanks for this

Curious thing! Thanks for sharing.

Well said Jees!

I think it's a case of imagination opens up the possabilities to do things, then Science is consulted to aid this thing getting done. Indeed imagination is king because it can dream up new things, it is our job to realise that thing.

Shamans for example work with the spiritial realms to create an effect in the physical realms.

Imagination over science, especially because science is but an insult to our imaginative capabilities, it is always in 'catch up' mode. Should we dismiss stuff untill science can prove it? Of course not, we might be waiting a very long time!

I haven't said much, Albert did it

I rather see imagination and science go hand in hand (as in no-insult), inspiring and motivating each other. A dynamic between them brings along that they are not always on same page. But that could be a synergistic motor too, not necessarily a competition.

If you see a scientific formula, one must imagine what the components actually represent, and how they dance with each other. Else it's just scrawled symbols. So science is a part of the imaginary realm in that way. Try to find a mathematical plane in nature, very hard, it must be imagined. I see not much of "versus" in "Imagination vs. Scientific evidence".