Saying that objective truth does not exist is a vastly different thing than saying it is unknowable. Even in the latter case, I would disagree with you (or at least with the implications of your statement), but your position would seem a bit more rational.
actually this is what I have seen over and over again in discussions of quantum physics, what is the point of claiming an objective truth exists if no one has ever nor will ever know one? to say they exist seems a faith not anything anyone can ever demonstrate.
however, you jumped to some wild conclusions about what I was intending and we have gone around and around about your misunderstanding not my original intention.
my orignal point was that if we can agree that THE TRUTH is a faith rather than a fact, people like JWs cannot get anykind of lock on us and use our own logic to their advantage. they make statements much like your examples and narrow down the possibilities to the ones they wish us to see and then hope that we ignore the FACT that their conclusions are just beliefs which have not be established, then using our assumption of one of those possibilities we leap to their desired conclusions.
a great example of this was on a TV show about eye witness testimony....
a woman was raped in her home... after she stopped struggling she told her self to remember every detail of his face that she could, she looked very very closely to any scars, marks, etc.
the police gave her a series of pictures to look at for possibles, and one of them seemed like the man.
they brought in the people and did the line up thing and she identified the very same man.
he was convicted and did jail time until DNA testing showed years later that he was innocent.
now, how did she make such a mistake?
one theory is that when the police gave her the pictures to chose from, she subconsciously ASSUMED that the perp had to be one of them and by process of elimination got rid of the obvious mis-matches and then updated her memories to the only one left over...which of course made him easier to pick out of the line up... psychologists have shown in some studies that asking a person if they saw something which was not a part of their original memory can have the power to add it to their memory and next time they are questioned they will say they saw it.
the world we know is not as stable as we think it is, our memories are often flawed but since our own system flawed them, we have no means to notice the flaws except by the word of others...and that of course makes the assumptions that 1. others exist, and 2. they are basically honest... which I think we both know is probably not true (^_^)
as a favorite author of mine has said: reality is what you can get away with.