Why would you bring privilege into an unrelated discussion? Also you're assuming a lot about my background that would surprise you. I wasn't born a software engineer. I chose the field deliberately as the best way to make money, and then fell in love with it after the fact. I'm self taught, a child of immigrants. I had a typical middle class childhood.

This part:

> I don't feel like I'm a member of many groups.

And this part:

> I suppose you could say I'm part of the group of Caucasian males by birth or part of the group of software engineers by trade,

So, you are belonging to three priviledged groups. Male, Caucasian, software engineer. It's easy to overlook this group membership, since it silently represents priviledge. Those outside these groups definitely notice that they are not in them. Ask a discriminated woman, a discriminated non-white, or an amazon warehouse worker.

That's why I pointed out that it's easy to forget group membership that confers priviledge.

> Also you're assuming a lot about my background

No, I went by exactly the information you conveyed yourself. See above.

In Canada? Software engineers are traditionally not well paid there. Plus I assume gangs of other kinds of engineers are always beating you up for calling yourself an engineer without an iron ring.

This discussion is about ideas (or opinions), not privileges.

You're right, it's about ideas, but the original article handles the interesting case where we fail to form or handle our ideas using "reason."

> The power of reasons is an illusion. The belief will not change when the reasons are defeated.

So privilege plays an interesting role. Unaware privilege - failing to see ones own circumstances, failing to assess how we fit in the world - is almost the same thing as non-reason. I suppose there could be a class of people who are like, "I am totally privileged, and somehow I delude myself and don't notice, but in every OTHER way I am totally reasonable." That could be a subgroup. But probably not a big one?