I've recently expanded (and hopefully improved) the paper I've been calling "Understanding Without Agreement". You'll notice that the paper actually questions how to make sense of the thought that we can understand people without agreeing with them, at least on certain issues of moral judgment.
In this newest version, I've added a couple examples, treated in some length, to help illustrate the difficulties in grasping other perspectives--at least, that our disagreement might reasonably lead one who has that perspective to say, "Well, you haven't really understood." (One example involves Elizabeth Costello of J.M. Coetzee's "The Lives of Animals", later included in the novel Elizabeth Costello. The other has to do with Amish forgiveness, as exemplified a few years ago in the Nickel Mines shootings.)
Comments here or by e-mail will be greatly appreciated!