I think we care, we are drawn to the truth. But when the truth threatens our hard-won and foundational worldview, the blinders go on.
So, despite being aware of what’s happening, we choose to interpret what’s happening according to our content (accumulated beliefs about what has happened and why), rather than being choicelessly aware of what’s happening.
No wonder we’re confused and conflicted. Why do we operate this way? Why can’t we abandon the practice of depending on what we think we know, and nakedly, choicelessly face actuality as it unfolds?
So the answer is no, we don’t care about the truth - at least not as much as our desire for pleasure and security (aka sorrow)
Thats why we follow rules that are demonstrably, obviously, incorrect and harmful.
Thats why facts have so little transformative power.
It’s not a why can’t ‘we’ question but a why can’t ‘I’ question. Isn’t it?
Another question is why can’t I have insight into what it actually is to be nothing? That my image of being nothing may be totally wrong?
Are not all of us unenlightened humans, each one of us, an I?
The image of what enlightenment is, may be as wrong as what the image of being nothing is?
Enlightenment is illumination, and we all know what it is to be in darkness when suddenly or gradually, there is light.
We can’t know what “being nothing is” because we can’t imagine nothing. But we know what darkness and light are, so we can imagine the darkness of confusion and conflict being dispelled by the light of clarity.