It suggests that life is a problem that can be solved

[GoodTaste]

The logic is not clear to me: Because "It (the concept of enlightenment) suggests that life is a problem that can be solved" (supposed the expression as A), so it is anti-spiritual?

To me, solving a great problem is both spiritual and practical.

Well, we have to consider all the author have said: he also said "(it suggests that life is) a cul-de-sac that can be, and should be, escaped" (supposed the expression as B) - B is indeed anti-spiritual to me: because human life is not a cul-de-sac; though we face problems in our life, we can solve them rather than escape from them.

See, the author's two expressions (A and B) seem to have contradicted each other. But I am not sure about this.

Your comment will be appreciated.


-----------------------
It seems legitimate to ask whether a path that turns away from aspects of life as essential as sexuality and parenthood is truly spiritual. From this perspective, the very concept of enlightenment begins to look anti-spiritual: It suggests that life is a problem that can be solved, a cul-de-sac that can be, and should be, escaped.

Source

 

[Raymott]

If I understand you, you are saying that both A and B indicate that enlightenment is anti-spiritual. How then are the statements contradictory?

 

[GoodTaste]

If I understand you, you are saying that both A and B indicate that enlightenment is anti-spiritual. How then are the statements contradictory?

I said A is spiritual, while B is anti-spiritual. So A and B are contradictory.

I've explained why A is spiritual, because "A, by being solving a great problem, is both intelligent/spiritual and practical."

Yet the author meant A and B were both anti-spiritual.

 

[Raymott]

So, you are disagreeing with the author about whether life being a problem to be solved is spiritual or not.
To me, solving a problem is not inherently spiritual. The author believes that life is to be lived, not solved.

The grammar of the sentence, "It suggests that life is a problem that can be solved, a cul-de-sac that can be, and should be, escaped" indicates that the writer is equating "a problem that can be solved" with "a cul-de-sac than can be, and should be, escaped". They are mentioned in apposition.
There's no problem with the logic; it's just that you believe that solving problems is spiritual, and the writer believes that calling life a problem that can be, or needs to be, solved is not spiritual.