Which logical fallacy suggests that an argument cannot be trusted because of issues with only a part of the evidence?

The logical fallacy known as "Disproving a Minor Point" occurs when an argument is dismissed based on the fallacy that any flaws or issues with a small part of the evidence invalidate the entire argument. In critical thinking and debate, it is essential to evaluate arguments in their entirety rather than focusing on isolated aspects. This fallacy highlights the fact that an argument can still hold merit despite minor errors or questionable evidence related to a single component.

For example, if a person presents a well-supported argument but makes one mistake in citing a statistic, dismissing the entire argument based solely on that small error is an instance of this fallacy. It overlooks the overall strength of the argument and the validity of the majority of the supporting evidence.

In contrast, the other options refer to different types of fallacies or logical errors. An inconsequent argument deals with arguments that are not relevant to the conclusion, a leading question prompts a respondent toward a particular answer, and diversion (also known as red herring) involves introducing irrelevant information to distract from the main point. Each of these does not accurately capture the nature of dismissing an argument based on minor points of evidence.