That's one way of looking at it. I believe Daoism might support that return to ordinary experience, the irony that we're looking for what's been in front of us all along. But you need that shift in perspective to see what you've been missing.
The notion that ordinary folks are already enlightened even though they're not reflective, or indeed precisely because they're not caught up in their intellect is pretty dubious, though. If they're enlightened, then the word has no meaning. They're in Plato's cave, or in Buddhist terms they're chasing after their cravings, having prized their illusory self.
A Zen Buddhist would say that the intellect is a trap. But that's why I said the modern Enlightenment was a secularization of that older, more experiential kind of enlightenment. I had a long debate with a reader about the difference between experiential/mystical and secular/progressive enlightenment:
