Straw man fallacy

The straw man fallacy distorts an opponent’s argument, makes it easier to attack, and then “refutes” that invented version. It derails the real discussion.

Example

“I propose regulating betting ads.”
“So you want to ban all entertainment.”
(The proposal is exaggerated to refute it.)

Applied example (political)

“We should cut inefficient spending.”
“So you want to destroy public healthcare.”
(The proposal is replaced with an extreme.)

Applied example (mystical)

“There is no evidence of healing energies.”
“So you believe everything is cold materialism.”
(The position is distorted to attack it.)

Why it is fallacious

• It does not address the real argument.
• It creates a caricature that is easy to defeat.
• It prevents honest analysis of the original position.

How to spot it

• The argument is rephrased in extreme terms.
• Key nuances are removed.
• The opponent says: “That’s not what I said.”

How to respond

• Return to the exact formulation of the claim.
• Ask to critique the real version, not the invented one.
• Request precise quotes or summaries.