 Geluk philosophers take the radically anti-foundationalist, antirealist Consequence School (Prāsaṅgika Madhyamaka), grounded in the texts of the Indian Buddhist philosophers Buddhapālita and Candrakīrti, to be the most sophisticated school of Buddhist philosophy. The Consequence School gets its name from the fact that it relies on reductio argument to demonstrate emptiness, in contrast to independent formal arguments. According to Tsongkhapa, no independent formal argument can prove the emptiness of phenomena to those not already convinced of that fact because these arguments presuppose a common understanding of the terms used. That is, this kind of formal argument presumes that a subject matter is objective or given and is understood in the same way by all parties to the debate, and he follows Candrakīrti in arguing that this cannot be the case when an antirealist (who understands emptiness) and a realist (who lacks an understanding of emptiness) engage in dialogue (Changkya in Cozort 1998, 451). This is because a proponent of the Consequence School consents to no such given, objective facts.