Can someone please explain this question

Hi @liwenong28, Thanks for the question! So we’re being asked for a flaw in this argument here. First, what’s the conclusion? That we shouldn’t build the space station. And why? Well, everything else: the US space station project isn’t properly planned, for various reasons. But what are these reasons? That the original purpose was lost. But is that fatal to the project? No, not necessarily. The argument just points out a shortcoming (that the original purpose was lost), and then immediately concludes that it’s fatal without further evidence. This is what (E) says, and that makes it the correct answer. Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.

Ah this makes sense! Thank you very much for your explanation!

Glad it helped!