Professor Shalom Tzadik does not see any external validity in the Torah and the commandments, and he is trying to revive the school of “religious philosophy” from the Middle Ages (as he understands it; in my unlearned opinion he is putting words into Maimonides’ mouth a bit).
In his view, there are philosophical and social reasons to be religious, with an emphasis on Judaism, even without any supernatural belief at all. Kind of like Buddhism.
According to him, keeping the religious principles is not enough. He calls for observing all the commandments, strict and lenient alike, “so that the system won’t fall apart,” and so on.

It’s easy to see that this is really not Rabbi Michi’s position at all, since what interests him is not what makes you happy, but simply what is true.

I too, insignificant as I am, find his approach very strange. In my opinion, in order to be religious (fanatical—Prof. Tzadik goes around with tekhelet tzitzit and magnificent sidelocks) without believing in any essential validity, you need the personality of a rigid pedant, a tiresome formalist.
In addition, I do not see Judaism as a historical phenomenon the way he sees it. And even if I did, I still don’t really understand how one can be such an extremely fanatical conservative around an archaic and anachronistic legal system. To me this is just a rationalization for an atheist (probably actually a deist. It’s not really clear from him) who is comfortable with the community and the family.

From his perspective, atheists should behave like religious people, including all the details and fine points.

Michi, I know you don’t see any religious value in that. Would you join his call regardless of your religious belief? Would you tell a secular person to become religious because, in your view, it’s a good way of life for the individual and for society?

Absolutely not. I would tell him not to observe anything at all.