Several people asked me to enlarge on my previous post, [agnostic.com] about why I think that secularism and what some people call, “enlightenment”, (And usually waste time looking to religion for.) are the same thing. But let's keep it short and end with a video instead of too much waffle.
Imagine for a second or two, just hypothetically for the sake of the thought experiment, that there is a creator god. It is a common place answer from agnostic/atheists, to reply to those who say that they value belief in gods. “But which god ?” Pointing out that there are many, all supported by the same pathetic evidence, and all joylessly contradicting each other.
But why not take it a stage further, and ask. “How do you know that the real god, is not one who prefers atheists most of all, and most wants people to NOT believe in it ?”
For, is it not true, that the only certain gifts that any possible creator has given us, are the material gifts of the material world. Which means almost certainly, that, not only the wish for another life, but even the search to find a god who chooses to be hidden, or the desire to find so called “higher” meaning, is just sad a way to tell any creator who may be listening, that we are not happy with, and do not value, the very real and wonderful gifts it did give us ?
Which is why, in my opinion at least, be there a god or not, secularism and even moderate nihilism, are the closest things to true enlightenment you will ever find. And if you wish to lose yourself, because you think selflessness is the best way to enlightenment. Then losing yourself in appreciation of life's gifts, even, in fact especially, the small and simple material gifts. While learning to enhance your powers of appreciation for those. Is much better than the vainglorious search for some grand ( spiritual ) higher purpose, and probably much more likely to win the approval of any creator god who may be watching, while if there is none, then it is certainly the only true way to happiness.
But you do not want to read me, for too long, so here is a video about the one ancient world philosopher, who I think came closest to a true secular enlightenment, and who explained it far better than I can, though we have slight differences.
I like the proposal that one may infer that the lack of evidence for a god means that it does not want worship nor even to be acknowledged. That makes much more sense than religionist claims that an god deserves and should be worshiped which confers the worst egomaniac human traits onto an entity that is otherwise incomprehensible.
It is unreasonable to suppose a loving god would leave no evidence but then demand utter fealty under pain of eternal torture.