Which fallacy is often used to ignore the original argument by changing the subject?

The fallacy that is often used to ignore the original argument by changing the subject is known as diversion. This technique shifts the focus away from the topic at hand, redirecting the discussion to a different issue that may seem related but ultimately distracts from the main point. Diversion is effective in debates or discussions where one party may not have a strong response to the original argument and seeks to evade it by introducing an irrelevant point.

For example, during a discussion about environmental policies, if one party shifts the topic to unrelated economic statistics instead of addressing the specific environmental concerns raised, that would illustrate the use of diversion. This tactic not only sidesteps the original argument but also can mislead the audience into thinking the new subject is related when it is not.

In contrast, other fallacies mentioned do not precisely describe this tactic. Cherrypicking focuses on selectively presenting evidence that supports one side while ignoring contrary evidence. Equivocation involves using ambiguous language or terms in misleading ways. The Straw Man fallacy misrepresents an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack, rather than simply changing the subject. Each of these fallacies serves its own purpose in argumentation but does not encapsulate the essence of diverting attention from the original argumentative