Essayist: It is much less difficult to live an enjoyable life if one is able to make lifestyle choices that accord with one’s personal beliefs and then see those choices accepted by others. It is possible for people to find this kind of acceptance by choosing friends and associates who share many of their personal beliefs. Thus, no one should be denied the freedom to choose the people with whom he or she will associate.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the essayist’s argument?

(A) No one should be denied the freedom to make lifestyle choices that accord with his or her personal beliefs. - Incorrect. It does not justify the conclusion that no one should be denied the freedom to choose the people to associate with.

(B) One should associate with at least some people who share many of one’s personal beliefs. - Incorrect. Association with some people is not in scope of the question. The argument talks about generalization and some people will not help there.

(C) If having a given freedom could make it less difficult for someone to live an enjoyable life, then no one should be denied that freedom. - Correct. If association with people who share common belief makes life enjoyable and that freedom should be granted.

(D) No one whose enjoyment of life depends, at least in part, on friends and associates who share many of the same personal beliefs should be deliberately prevented from having such friends and associates. - Incorrect. The answer choice is narrow in scope. It only talks about people whose enjoyment depends on friends. Whereas the arguments talks about freedom to choose friends for all.

(E) One may choose for oneself the people with whom one will associate, if doing so could make it easier to live an enjoyable life. - Incorrect. This answer choice has similar problem as D. It narrows the scope people may choose certain friends only if it makes his life enjoyable. Whereas the conclusion talks about all the people.