Final answer:
Sam's argument for the Bosnian Pyramids reflects Kida's mistake of valuing personal perception over expert evidence. This exemplifies a cognitive error in thinking, highlighting the unreliability of senses in ascertaining truth and the importance of evaluating evidence in forming beliefs.
Step-by-step explanation:
Sam's argument for the Bosnian Pyramids illustrates one of Kida's mistakes that we make in our thinking, which is the reliance on perception rather than evidence. In thinking, Sam advocates believing our own eyes over the expert opinion of those with positions and titles. This represents a cognitive error where individuals prefer to trust direct experiences or perceptions, even when they might be misleading, over more authoritative or expert evidence that might contradict their beliefs.
What Sam is missing is that our senses can deceive us and what we see isn't always indicative of the truth. This is highlighted by various Gettier cases and concepts like the evil demon hypothesis and the Brain in a Vat, which all argue that our perceptions or reasons for believing something can be fallible and not necessarily connected to the actual truth.
Therefore, a more rigorous approach would require looking beyond immediate perception and critically evaluating evidence, understanding the influence of cognitive biases, and recognizing the importance of expert consensus in certain fields, all of which are components of sound reasoning. By doing so, we avoid the mistake of overreliance on our senses and the inherent limitations of personal experience in determining what is true.