  Even allowing for this attenuated sense of the voluntary, it is unclear why Arcesilaus would come to accept this impulsivist theory of action, if it were true: since—as the theory maintains—theory doesn’t inform action, it is difficult to explain theoretical commitments solely in terms of what appears suited to an agent (see Maconi 1988, Trabattoni 2005, and Vezzoli 2016). An NRNB reading of ‘the reasonable’ therefore concedes that Sextus may have elided important details (see Ioppolo 2018).