I don't disagree that these moments exist. Or that some people can be in them more than others. However, I don't necessarily believe that it should be a goal, and I doubt that we will evolve into it. I think it is a useful state at times, but possibly harmful at others.

In short, I think that all 'in the moment' existence requires acceptance of the local situation, and possibly of the global situation. It might feel right, but it may also be a very bad way to run a society. IMHO Buddhists might seem pleasant people, and they might have a good life, but I think they are often willfully unaware of a lot. These might be considered distractions, or harmful pursuits, but who is the Buddhist to judge, and why would their perspective be enlightened?

I get Zen. There are many times in my life when I am in the moment. When action or non-action is reason, and everything else is not. But IMHO enlightenment is not to subvert or evolve out of our full nature. I have a naturalist view of humanity, and as a result, I believe that all we are is a result of our history. Denying part will not lead to a sustainable place.

IMHO, enlightenment is understanding the whole package, and understanding how you can use the whole package to build a better world. Fear, happiness, greed, worry, anger, empathy, guilt, sadness, bordom, passion, etc., these are us. Something that didn't have these possibilities wouldn't be attaining to me. It would be subverting.