The argument from experience assumes that people who have lived through a series of experiences are authorities on any issues relevant to those experiences.
Here's my take on this. If you spent years in graduate school at Stanford studying organic chemistry... I'm not going to argue about which formula should be used to solve whatever. You win. You're an expert on something that can be presented, as is. But you can be that same person... You can walk around with your PhD tucked under your skin-that's tucked under your fancy suit-that's tucked under your white lab coat.. and you will not be able to make me listen to you as an expertise on something that can be different for each individual. There are exceptions, not really, but you get the gist of it. Somethings can only be strongly opinionated, period, impossible to state as facts.

example:

If you've been married before, let's assume that you were passionately in Love with whomever. But my saying you've been married before implies that it was an experience that has now ended. I can take into consideration what you're telling me more than the next person because it was something you delt with first hand.
Granted, I will listen to the intimacy you say that brought you together, and your explanations on why things failed between you. However, If you're talking to me as a Madame, I am not willing to hear that the same reasons your marriage flourished and wilted will be the same for mine.

stating the obvious.