The other thing is the Outside View summed up by the proverb "If two people think alike, one of them isn't thinking." In the majority of cases I observe ... that person is a sheeple and that leader has a cult.

Do you have a mechanistic unpacking (even a guess would be helpful) of what it is to be a "sheeple" or a "cult", and of what harms come from being a "sheeple"? Given Aumann, I'm more inclined to say that if two people have different beliefs, at least one of them isn't thinking.

That said, your point about respecting outside views is reasonable. Are you trying to avoid replacing the outside-presumed "badness" of cults/sheeple with understood mechanisms, so as to retain any usefulness that might be in the received heuristics and that you might not understand the mechanisms behind?