That is right, you would be using "peer" testimony.A man who gives peer testimony may not have ability in a specific field, but rather he or she likely has personal involvement with the current issue. In spite of the fact that peer testimony can without much of a stretch be tested, it can be a capable device in influencing a crowd of people, especially when conveyed or given by a very famous big name.
To start with, I've seen Samantha and Samandhi. And Samadhi Sutta, which interestingly discusses tranquillity and insight ( samatha and vipassana ).
There's another sutta which says that samatha and vipassana are paired qualities - samatha gets rid of passion, vipassana gets rid of delusion ( I'll see if I can find it ). Note that samatha is a quality, not a method.
Answer:
d
Explanation:
oooooooooooiiiiiooooooioo
Answer: unreliability
Explanation: Some of the problems that determine the quality of an experiment are reliability and validity.
Reliability considers the consistency of the experiment. In the example above, the result of the second sample is inconsistent with the result of the first sample, making Watt's research unreliable. That is, it does not reflect the ratings of a larger population. This problem can be solved by increasing the sample size, such that the average ratings are more reflective of a wider audience.
Validity considers the accuracy of the experiment. A lack of reliability of an experiment will likely make the result invalid as well, but this is not always the case.
Latin American independent movements
