Attitudes and biases

Hello Miki and have a good week!
In several places I have heard you say that if you reach a position on something, then the opposing position that contradicts that position stems from various biases. For example, if it is forbidden to leave Gaza, then anyone who says (for security reasons) that it is good to leave Gaza is motivated by biases. However, I would like to offer another explanation: Every person is structured differently, and gives different probabilities than other people on different basic assumptions. For example, a person can argue that the claim “there is no reason for anything” is a relatively reasonable claim, and another person can argue that it is clearly unreasonable. Or another example, a person can argue that the claim “we can attack Gaza even two months after the hostage deal, even if we signed with Hamas that we will not attack for 10 years, since we can always find something to attack about, and there is no reason to fear that the world will stop us” is a reasonable claim, while another would argue that it is not.
What I want to argue is that the plausibility of these claims and the differences in these plausibility between people can stem from differences in basic intuitions, and not necessarily from biases and brainwashing. I’m talking about theoretical people, of course, because as you keep saying, our discourse is full of biases on both sides and almost no one listens to anyone. I’m talking about people who hear positions, consider them seriously, take all positions seriously, and in the end express an honest and internal position (not from the language to the outside).
 
In such a situation, it is possible that the difference in positions does not stem from biases, but simply from a different intuitive structure that gives different probabilities to different assumptions/claims. My argument reminds me a bit of what you said in one of the series about the different religions: It is possible that a Christian will consider Judaism and a Jew will consider Christianity, and the Christian will come to the conclusion that Christianity is correct, and the Jew will come to the conclusion that Judaism is correct. It is not certain that one is biased, but it may be that this is what their intuitions both lead them to.
What do you think about these issues and my argument in favor of such a pluralism of positions? (Refinement – I am not claiming that there is no single truth, but that there are people who simply cannot reach this truth, and not because of biases, but because of a different intuition, just as a blind person cannot see and not because of biases).