Respectfully, I think your argument has gone off the rails a bit, or perhaps just devolved into splitting semantic hairs. Truth (writ large) in the context of this discussion is what is verifiable through scientific method. If someone either denies the validity of science or isn't interested in whether their beliefs are contradicted by it, then they can't lay claim to seeking Truth in matters such as what is actually (reliably) audible.
It is rigging the game to say "
one is only REALLY seeking the truth IF they are using the method I believe leads to the truth." No, people
care about the truth, but can vary in believing they have it, or how to get it. (That's why I have been deliberate in saying that many people with false believes - including cable luvin' audiophiles -
care that their beliefs are true. They prefer that their beliefs are try, rather than believing falsehoods. This was to avoid the misleading assumptions like the above).
You should see the flaw in that position pretty easily:
If we take what you just wrote seriously, then before the scientific method was developed, no one ever sought The Truth, or cared that their beliefs were true. (Ancient philosophers, among many, would like to have a word with you...)
Your (and JPs) position downplays the role of "mistakes" and "bias" in our attempt to justify our beliefs.
So, for instance, think of parents on a camping trip whose young child has wandered off in to the forest and they are frantically looking for her. As it happens, they made a wrong inference and headed west in the forest whereas their lost daughter is actually wandering east. Now, because the path the parents have chosen won't lead them to The Truth of where their daughter is, we wouldn't say "clearly they aren't REALLY seeking their daughter. That's not the path to get there, so they don't really care about the truth of where she is!"
We agree there I presume.
What this tells us is that "making mistakes" leading to false beliefs is completely compatible with"Caring About What Is True." (What you want to call seeking the truth).
I mean, if one doesn't accept this, it would entail that every time any scientist has arrived at a mistaken conclusion, through making one or more mistakes along the way, he/she/the community "wasn't seeking the truth." That would be a ridiculous view of human beings.
Now you no doubt want to say, as JP would, that
"Well, we HAVE a method that we know is more reliable at getting at truth, so if someone isn't using THAT method, then they can't really be seeking the truth!"***
The first thing to note: There are disagreements among scientists in various fields even about their methods and theories! Does it make sense for them all to diagnose each other as "not caring about the truth?" or to acknowledge they are simply disagreeing on what aspect might be more important in their theories, method, in seeking the truth?
But the main point I want to make is: The flaw there is to remain blind to the role of "mistakes" and "bias."
Humans are fallible. We aren't perfect reasoning machines. For the very same reason someone can still make mistakes, and come to wrong conclusions about ANYTHING - even while attempting to use a strong method of inquiry (e.g. science) - people can ALSO be mistaken about which method of inquiry is better or more likely to lead them to the truth!
This should be incredibly obvious if you just look around the world and see how many people devote their lives to belief systems and alternative epistemic concepts (e.g. religions among countless examples). Even philosophers who devote their lives to figuring out what can be known and how we can know it, come up with differing epistemologies! It would be utterly begging the question, and a facile view of human truth-seeking, for one philosopher to diagnose all the other philosophers as "not really "Well, if the rest of you guys really cared about the truth, you'd accept my arguments!"
People literally die for their mistaken beliefs, even their children die - based on religious beliefs, on thinking someone had the power to heal who did not heal, maybe based on the advise of psychics, or bogus medical cures, you name it. It's not because they don't care about the truth - it's because they have made MISTAKES leading to the wrong path to truth. And human bias greases this ride for everyone.