What does the strawman fallacy involve?

The strawman fallacy involves misrepresenting or exaggerating an opponent’s argument in order to make it easier to attack or refute. This tactic typically involves simplifying, distorting, or otherwise altering the original position of the opponent to create a "straw man" that can be knocked down with greater ease.

This tactic is disingenuous because it does not engage with the actual argument being presented. Instead, it diverts the discussion away from the nuanced points made by the opponent and instead focuses on a weaker version of their stance. For example, if someone argues for a moderate policy change, a strawman might mischaracterize their position as wanting to abolish an entire system entirely, making it easier to argue against.

The other choices describe different types of logical fallacies or persuasive tactics but do not capture the essence of the strawman fallacy. Upgrading the importance of an original claim would typically involve a different style of argument, assuming a conclusion without evidence pertains to the begging the question fallacy, and using emotional appeals without addressing the logic of the argument refers to an appeal to emotion fallacy. Therefore, option B stands out as the correct definition of the strawman fallacy.