That's a bit facile. The evidence for "universal truth" comprises many data points, of which DigitalJack's is one, and yours is one. It's not that the approach is invalid or the anecdote uninteresting, but that these are samples of size one (i.e. anecdotes) and hence insufficient for inference.
Yeah, that's what I was saying. He is taking his personal experience, and generalizing it as if it were a universal truth. That's why I said exactly that.
