Indeed, just because I think that what I write is true doesn't make it so. I might be mistaken.
You suggest, though, that I have a hidden agenda of "aggrandizing my popularity" with the others who "fall into this outrage trap."
First of all, you've gone ad hominem. Second, if I were writing in bad faith and only wanted to be popular, why on earth would I write only dark philosophical articles? Are you unaware of the fact that by far the most popular genres on Medium are technology, business start-ups, self-help, and romance?
But no, since 2011, beginning on my blog, I've written only philosophical articles, despite the relative unpopularity of philosophy; moreover, I've written politically incorrect, existential philosophy, criticizing not just theism, for example, but also new atheism, not just conservatism but liberalism too, and so on.
That indicates to anyone with any sense that I care about philosophy and about writing what I think is true, not about being popular. So your cheap personal attack is laughable on its face.
You say that my moral claims may be just fictions. Actually, I've written numerous articles that aim to reconstruct morality in aesthetic terms, which entail that all philosophies are largely fictive, including mine. (Links below.)
You suggest I have no "right or insight" to "advance myself" as a presumed judge of human conduct.
No right even to write what I want? And who are you supposed to be, pretending to be Christ-like with your biblical accusations of hypocrisy?
The reason modern Western societies have freedom of speech laws is that modernity is grounded in the scientific undermining of theocratic Church dogmas. All our technological progress over the last few centuries is due to our subversive zeitgeist, to put the point figuratively. So when I aim to enlighten and to burst our mass delusions, I’m being true to the core of modern Western civilization.
Maybe you fear the myths and conventions you take for granted really are dubious upon philosophical reflection, which drove you to the desperate tactic of personally attacking a critic who points out that the emperor’s wearing no clothes. Maybe you’re like those monkeys that cover their eyes and ears to avoid seeing or hearing evil, as if doing so makes the evil truth go away. Do you see how easy it is to resort to personal attacks? It’s cheap and beneath the dignity of intellectuals (those who care about ideas).
I’ve written hundreds and hundreds of philosophical articles after doing a Ph.D. in philosophy. What have you done to show that you care about getting to the truth?