Fair enough. 
I have often found that different perspectives are helpful; the more, the better. And so I am often confused when some people advocate one perspective — one, and only one — to apply to any particular problem.
Even if different perspectives seem to contradict one another, there is still much to be learnt. In this case, perhaps a contradiction might indicate a problem more basic/fundamental than we first thought…?
And so the “stalemate” is not so much a problem, as a prompt to think more deeply, and maybe widely too. IMO! 