Yes, David, I was aware of this discussion.  It does not answer my objection. It only reinforces it.

You say for example "survey votes are likely to be a poor guide to philosophical truth."  But votes are not simply "a poor guide".  They are absolutely no guide at all to philosophical truth. That was the point of my objection.  And a danger of the the survey, I suggested, was that it might encourage some people to think it does constitute some sort of guide, even a poor one.

Your example - the hypothetical philosopher who doesn't refer to a particular argument because she thinks a majority of philosophers don't accept it, when in fact they do - does nothing to reassure me.  The moral I would draw from this is that the philosopher concerned should be encouraged to think for herself, and to argue her own point of view irrespective of what the majority might think. Putting survey results at her disposal is only likely to encourage the "group think" attitude that seems to have influenced her.

If this is what the "sociology of philosophy" is about, I would recommend scrapping it, post haste.

DA