  The ancient evidence about Arcesilaus’ philosophy is difficult to evaluate and, in some respects, inconsistent. As a result, scholars interpret his skepticism in several ways. Some see his philosophical activity as entirely negative or destructive of all views. Others take him to have held positive views, but not on any philosophical topic, including the possibility of knowledge. Some regard him as having supposed on the basis of arguments that nothing could be known, while still others view him as someone who refused to accept any philosophical theory or proposition as rationally warranted, insisting that further examination is always required.