If we want to understand someone on a general-human level/in his humanwide aspects–we only have to ignore the ideological predominance in our perception direction and interpretation patterns. The patterns of our contingent subjective worldview (as single subject) and our particularist (as our self-fixation and attribution to a) group-construction and ideology.
We cannot ignore the ideological-particularist level for a longer time. It’s (as we always look for patterns, but can also perceive more than that) one constitutive pattern of all human beings. But it’s not the only one. And if we want to understand to some extent „the other“, we only (would) have to ignore/put aside our ideological self- and group-constructive patterns. After we took a non-ideological look at the other we wouldn’t be able to not longer having an ideological pattern, but we would have checked and balanced a little by risking/taking a break from our particularist ideological stability for concretely experiencing what we theoretically/abstractly always know/can feel parallel to our subjective limits and our particularist constructions: That „the other“ is a human being like us in the way that she/he is thrown into this existence, life and world just like us.