Note: "[Falsifiable](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem#Falsifiability)" doesn't mean "false".

Is the concept of privilege falsifiable?  There's a criticism levelled at the notion privilege — when you try to explain privelege to someone, if they don't understand it, then the conclusion is "you can't won't understand privilege precisely because you're priveleged".

That kind of feels like circular reasoning.  I'm not concerned here with how to convince critics.  Rather, I'm interested in 












Fallacies this seems like:

    circular reasoning
    obscurantism
    ipse dixit
    handwaving
    proof by intimidation

It reminds me of people who say that God exists because "Humans can't understand God, they just can't.  Sure, there are lots of things about God that seem contradictory, but I can't answer those questions, because God is just too complex."  That specific case is a cop-out.




I'm not trying to figure out how to convince people.  Rather,