Question

warm up
main argument of entire text: we should not require drivers’ tests.
driving tests infringe against equality of opportunity. wealthy people have no problem in paying for driving lessons and the test, but poor people can barely afford to run a car and it is unrealistic to expect them to pay for lessons and tests, too.

1. what is one flaw (fallacy) in the logic of this paragraph?

1. what is one (hidden) assumption made in this paragraph?

Explanation:

For the first sub - question (flaw in logic):

The argument commits the fallacy of false dichotomy or over - simplification. It assumes that the only factor affecting the ability to take driving tests is wealth, ignoring other possible factors like the importance of driving tests for safety (e.g., ensuring all drivers have basic skills to reduce accidents), and also that there are no alternative ways for poor people to access driving lessons or tests (like subsidies, community programs, etc.). Another way to look at it is the fallacy of appealing to equality of opportunity in a misdirected way: driving tests are not about equality of opportunity in the sense of just being able to afford it, but about ensuring that all drivers are competent, so framing it as an equality of opportunity issue for affordability is a flawed appeal.

A hidden assumption is that the cost of driving lessons and tests is the only barrier to taking the test, and that there are no other factors (like the need for driving competence, or alternative ways to finance lessons/tests) that matter. Also, it assumes that equality of opportunity in driving (being able to get a license) should be based solely on the ability to pay for lessons and tests, rather than on having the necessary driving skills. Another assumption is that not being able to afford lessons and tests means one should not be required to take them, ignoring the public safety aspect of having only competent drivers on the road.

Answer:

One flaw is the fallacy of misdirected appeal to equality of opportunity (or false dichotomy), as it ignores the safety purpose of driving tests and alternative means for poor people to access tests/lessons, and misframes the test requirement as an equality - of - opportunity (affordability) issue rather than a safety/competence issue.

For the second sub - question (hidden assumption):