You’re also using circular logic; because you believe that the rishonim were biased and influenced by things other than their pure torah/shoresh neshoma, then when i say that “how can torah that’s a result of bias be binding?” your answer is “ain hachi nami, but that’s an extreme view”…. it’s just the logical extent of your perspective. What i clearly said is that they were NOT biased, and that their Torah is pure.
There is, at the very least, consistency in the reform mindset. They believe that the torah entirely is man made, and therefore don’t keep it. There is less consistency in conservative, which believes that the Torah is “divinely inspired” but also the product of human bias, especially torah she baal peh. They are wishy washy, accepting some teachings as divine and eschewing others, usually based on what’s in vogue at the time.
Your perspective though, is untenable. The logical extension of a claim that the transmitters of torah, be they chazal, rishonim, or achronim, are transmitting not torah, but an admixture of cultural, sociological and philosophical biases…is that their torah is not binding. The other side, one that is “evidenced” in chazal (kol ma shetalmid vasik…and many other examples), is that the torah that we have, both oral and written, is from Hashem. It is 100% true, emes veyatziv. It has no mixture of non-jewish ideology, or personal bias. It has been preserved through the process of torah lishma, something academics have no grasp of…a language of itself, with siyata dishmaya and kedushah, even ruach hakodesh.
As a halachik example, the divrei chaim (y.d. 400-something) has a famous teshuva regarding a rebbe in a cheder who taught his students that the ohr hachaim was a great sefer, but was not written with ruach hakodesh. The divrei chaim in this piece discusses what ruach hakodesh is, and concludes that it is the ability to be mechaven to the amitah shel torah, which is something every talmid chacham can do. That is evidenced by the gemara in gittin regarding pilegesh begivah. He further says that to deny this concept, essentially that the torah is hefker subject to human error, that talmidei chachamim are not imbued with siyata dishmaya and the ability to ve mechaven to the amitah shel torah, is apikorsus. One can reach this level of apikorsus by taking some api-courses in a local college on jewish studies, because that’s exactly the problem with the academic method. It strips the Torah of its divine quality, and its divine method of preservation and transmission.