In Townville, most smokers play tennis, and most nonsmokers do not play tennis. Therefore, in Townville, most tennis players smoke.
Which of the following exhibits a pattern of flawed reasoning most similar to that in the argument above?
A. In Townville, most Lions Club members were born in Townville, and most of the residents who are not Lions Club members were not born in Townville. Therefore, most of the residents who were born in Townville are Lions Club members.
B. In Townville, most of the people who live west of Main Street own a GPS live east of Main Street. Therefore, most of the people in Townville own a GPS.
C. In Townville, most cat owners own exactly one dog, and most dog owners own more than one dog. Therefore, most of the people in Townville who own more than one dog do not own any cats.
D. In Townville, most tennis players play golf, but not every golfer plays tennis. Therefore, in Townville, there are more tennis players than golfers.
E. In Townville, most of the houses are painted red, and most of the houses have a pool. Therefore, in Townville, most of the houses are painted red and have a pool.
I don't understand why the reasoning is flawed in the first place, since both statements mention "in Townville."
Here are my notes gathered from the two statements:
Most smokers ---> Tennis Players
Most nonsmokers ---> Not Tennis Players
So,
Most Tennis Players ---> Smokers
If most smokers in Townville are tennis players, then most tennis players in Townville must be smokers, right? S = T , so T = S ??
Thanks for any explanations.