Which fallacy is present when an argument refutes an exaggerated or distorted version of the opponent's position?

The fallacy present when an argument refutes an exaggerated or distorted version of the opponent's position is known as the Straw Man fallacy. This occurs when one party misrepresents or oversimplifies someone else's argument to make it easier to attack. By doing so, they avoid engaging with the actual argument being made, instead substituting it with a fabricated version that is easier to discredit.

In a typical straw man scenario, the arguer may take a position that is extreme or ridiculous, framing it as the opposition's viewpoint, which they then successfully refute. This technique can create the illusion of having effectively countered the actual argument, despite failing to address the real points brought forth. This tactic undermines constructive debate and can mislead an audience about the true nature of the opposing argument.

The other options, such as appeal to ignorance, diversion, and disproving a minor point, do not fit this definition and address different conceptual missteps or rhetorical strategies that do not involve distorting an opponent’s position in the way that a Straw Man does.