yeah, but he was very clearly casting the whole thing as an "emperor's new clothes" situation with the implication that the unpopular opinions were self-evidently true but unmentionable.
He's not saying that any unpopular opinion is self-evidently true if people oppose it with such zeal. He's saying that there exist self-evidently true opinions that will be treated that way, and if you harbor one of those you should choose the Kolmogorov option. How do you know you're harboring one of those? The evidence will support it.
That there exist unpopular opinions etc.; in other words, mathematical implication, not equivalence.
From this, it doesn't follow that any unpopular opinion is etc.: I think that the existence of {unpopular and {false and/or mentionable}} opinions is also evident.
