Instructors Please help!

vishalwin wrote:If something would have been justifiably regretted if
it had occurred, then it is something that one should
not have desired in the first place. It follows that
many forgone pleasures should not have been
desired in the first place.

The conclusion above follows logically if which one
of the following is assumed?

Look at the line of reasoning in the argument. If something would have been regretted, then it should not have been desired. So many forgone pleasures should not have been desired.

Something is missing. Where is the connection between forgone pleasures and pleasures that would have been regretted?

This question is tricky because in many people's minds some forgone pleasures would have been regretted. So they automatically make connections between forgone, would have been regretted, and should not have been desired without realizing that they are adding something unstated to the argument.

(A) One should never regret one's pleasures.

This is not necessary for the argument to work. The argument is based on the idea that things that would have been regretted should not have been desired.

(B) Forgone pleasures that were not desired would
not have been justifiably regretted.

The argument is not about pleasures that were not desired. It's about pleasures that were.

(C) Everything that one desires and then regrets
not having is a forgone pleasure.

This is totally off base.

(D) Many forgone pleasures would have been
justifiably regretted.

This is the missing connection. In order to make its point about forgone pleasures, the argument assumes that some of them would have been justifiably regretted.

(E) Nothing that one should not have desired in
the first place fails to be a pleasure.

This adds a whole new illogical idea to the situation, one that is not necessary for the argument to work.

So the correct answer is D.