My point is that knowledge and truth, like any other two objects, are orthogonal. This means that they are perpendicular, that they are diametrically opposed, that they have nothing in common, that they have no meeting point, that they are two independent objects, that they are different, etc.
Because they are two objects, rather than one object, assigning them different values does not lead to a contradiction.
Contradiction is a situation in which one attempts to assign two different values to one and the same object.
We can say that Alex is short and Tom is tall and there will be no contradiction so as long Alex and Tom are two different individuals. However, if Alex and Tom are merely two different words that refer to one and the same individual, then we have a contradiction because one and the same individual cannot be both tall and not tall (which is what short implies.)
Because I consider knowledge and truth to be two different objects, there is no contradiction when I say that knowledge is one thing and truth is another.
However, if you think they are one and the same object – if you confuse the two – you will consider any suggestion that knowledge is one thing and truth is another to be “dissonant” and “confusing”.
Thus, the only relevant question is whether knowledge and truth are one and the same thing or two different things.
Which is basically the question of the fundamental nature of reality: difference or similarity?
In the universe of difference, there can be no “one and the same object” other than in the subjective sense which is established by ignoring difference.