#### EzekielRaiden

##### Follower of the Way

This doesn't address the asymmetry between the claims.It is if that's all they said.

"I didn't have a problem, so no problems exist" is a universal negative argued from an existential negative: "There is at least one X such that P is false" cannot, even in principle, prove "For all X, P is false." This is not valid reasoning. An existential negative cannot, even in principle, prove a universal negative.

"I had a problem, therefore a problem exists" is two existential positives: "There is at least one X such that P is true, therefore P is true for some X." This is valid reasoning. Now, it

*would*be a flaw if the claim were instead, "I had a problem, therefore

*everyone*has a problem" ("There is at least one X such that P is true, therefore for all X, P is true.") But I've never seen anyone make that argument. Essentially everyone recognizes that it is possible, whether intentionally or coincidentally, to never have a problem of this kind. Hence, no one is arguing that everyone definitely always has a problem--only that there

*are*situations where the problem crops up.