The redneck strike again.

[The Grand Nudger]

The problem with things like spirituality and enlightenment is the idea that there's some supernatural dimension involved. Enlightenment can be seen as psychology.

Agreed, and if both serve the same ends - albeit in different ways...and all other things being equal - it hardly matters to me how one might choose to experience or describe that internally. Once we start to try and communicate our ideas though, the normal rules apply. We explain the unknown by reference to the known. If I have the choice of communicating something -to someone else- in terms of psychology or spirituality, I'm going to stick with psychology because it's much more proficient at making statements and drawing conclusions that can be objectively expressed and relied upon/falsified. The "spirituality" bit has embedded trash in any case, at the very least - getting in the way of doing this. If we're going to "see" it as psychology.......then why describe it by reference to "spirit" anyway? Wouldnlt that just be an unwarranted and shameless plugging ion of concepts we wanted to attach to a model we feel fits better than the one in which those concepts arise and are dependent upon? I get using them..utilizing them for an effect. But even pretending that a truth value can be assigned to them in some means similar to psychology is being very - very loose (and is implicitly invoking the authority of psychology over "spirit" anyway - so "spirit" is irrelevant).