[Tuckerism]

I've always used the terms "lens" or "worldview" to describe that starting point, and I think the most fruitful conversations with people I don't agree with usually stem around understanding that we do our personal calculus differently, and that doesn't make them a terrible human being. We both certainly believe that we have the correct view (or we wouldn't hold it), we're not diminishing that there is a reality where one of us is likely correct and the other is wrong, but that we don't have all of the information to say that someone is being willfully ignorant, as other replies have stated.

[native_samples]

A more rigorous version of this can be found in the book, Conflict of Visions by Thomas Sowell. What you're calling a lens or worldview, he calls a "vision". He precisely defines two visions that are at opposite ends of an axis and which differ only in a single assumption: an intuition about the span of human nature. He then proceeds to show how this single intuition leads by logical extrapolation when combined with unambiguous facts to lead people to opposing policy preferences.

It's really a very powerful analysis, because it's Occam's Razor compliant. The theory is simple yet has great explanatory power.