Truth is a complicated matter. That’s why caution is warranted when someone comes along with simple “truths” and claims them for themselves. Basically, this only works in the natural and technical sciences (see wiki).
At least with everything biological, I’m a strong proponent of Radical Constructivism and especially with humans, I think it’s inhumane to deny them their own truth, i.e., to apply a strictly technical/mathematical definition of truth:
Let’s assume (e.g., in a war or something), a person sees something for a few seconds that traumatizes them for the rest of their life. Other people see this too, but it doesn’t affect them. For the former, this brief moment (over time) becomes “truth” because it changes their life. For the others, truth might be the sum of individual moments, which physically of course they’re right about. But to then tell the traumatized person: “You didn’t experience truth, because physically much more happened. Your truth is false/incomplete etc.” I personally find inhumane. If this is additionally argued with great self-evidence and conviction, one has to ask oneself whether and how much empathy is still present…