Who doesn't have a blind spot?

We have all heard of the illustration of five blind men and an elephant. With each man only able to touch one part of the animal--one feeling the trunk, another a tusk, a different man touching a foot, etc.--they each gather a completely different experience and form different beliefs about what an elephant actually is. Some people use this to 'explain' the differences between all religions concluding that all paths lead to the same truth; while all the men describe something completely different, there is just one elephant. 

This sounds open-minded and accepting...except that proponents of this view (and it is just another point of view) assume that they are not blind and can see the whole elephant at once. This assumption of being all-seeing is in fact a similarly close minded view to the ones they critique while being, ironically, the most arrogant position of all religious views(!)

Richard Wurmbrand once wrote that every perspective has a blind spot. For example, when we look to the ceiling, we will not see the floor, when we look down on the floor, the ceiling exits our view. Therefore the more we fixate on one point of view, the more we will miss other vantage points. In this case, if we fixate on neutralizing differences, ironically, we nullify the legitimacy of each perspective.

The way to work out differences isn't to pretend they are not there. Instead we are much better off acknowledging that we, finite human beings, have blinds spots and working to understand other people's points of view.