Let's take Hindi and English.let's say I'm talking to "Fred" who is 15 years older than me.
In english I would say " Fred how are you doing?"
The Hindi version would be "uncle friend how are you? (using the respectful forms of the word "you"). And because I'm using the respectful form, I would genuinely feel more respectful of all my elders.
To take your example, as far as I know there's no difference in the respect I feel for people when using a language where the courtesy form of "you" is basically mandatory (German), archaic and basically never used (Finnish), or non-existent (English). Now, maybe there is some effect there that I can't notice that could be ferreted out with some psychological experiment. But the original claim that everyone knowing more than one language would implicitly be agreeing with the article is just not true.
I agree that it's not at all obvious from my experience that there would be such significant differences between languages.
Or oppressed by them. Or annoyed by the (often) increased length from using honorifics.
That's a horrific blanket statement I see associated all the time with language-affecting-thought, and it flies in the face of people's actual behavior, and completely ignores social pressures that I would think are massively more influential. Which will influence your thought more: that your language has honorifics, or that you'll be pounded and/or ostracized for not using them? Our survival and social instincts are rather powerful.
The differences aren't necessarily as sweeping as 'world view'. I don't change political preferences by changing language.