There the danger doesn't seem to be getting something that isn't the truth, the danger is stopping at something that's just true enough for a certain purpose, and no more.

Why is that bad?

And a seeker of truth seems less likely to get stuck there than a seeker of win - witness classical mechanics, which is still close enough to be useful for everything practical, versus relativity, which exists because Einstein wouldn't accept a theory which worked well enough but had a few little loose ends.

How has relativity made us better off? If you want to pursue truth because you like truth, that's great -- it's a "win" for you. But if you only need the truth to get to something else, it's not a win to add useless knowledge.

Are you sure that this isn't all about signaling being a truth-seeker? (i.e. "Truth-Seeking Isn't About The Truth")

After all, credibly signaling that you value the truth could make you a valuable ally, be considered a neutral judge, etc. etc. For these reasons, credibly valuing the truth above all else might be beneficial... for reasons not having anything to do with actually getting to the truth.

So, if you're saying we should seek truth just because it's the truth, and not because it brings practical benefit or pleasure or sends good signals, then what is the use of seeking truth?