This first book-length treatment of ancient self-refutation provides a unified account of what is distinctive in the ancient approach to the self-refutation argument. It advances our understanding of influential and debated texts and arguments from philosophers like Democritus, Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, the Stoics, the Academic sceptics, the Pyrrhonists and Augustine.

A 'self-refutation argument' is any argument which aims at showing that (and how) a certain thesis is self-refuting. This study was the first book-length treatment of ancient self-refutation and provides a unified account of what is distinctive in the ancient approach to the self-refutation argument, on the basis of close philological, logical and historical analysis of a variety of sources. It examines the logic, force and prospects of this original style of argumentation within the context of ancient philosophical debates, dispelling various misconceptions concerning its nature and purpose and elucidating some important differences which exist both within the ancient approach to self-refutation and between that approach, as a whole, and some modern counterparts of it. In providing a comprehensive account of ancient self-refutation, the book advances our understanding of influential and debated texts and arguments from philosophers like Democritus, Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, the Stoics, the Academic sceptics, the Pyrrhonists and Augustine.

'This is an outstanding study. Over the course of fifteen chapters, Castagnoli offers sharp analysis and clear insight into the nature and logic of some of, if not most of, the classic self-refutation arguments found in the ancient authors ? The argumentation throughout is tight, the textual analysis sharp, and the writing style agreeably fluid. Castagnoli is thorough in documenting the secondary material and gracious in his acknowledgments and disagreements ? the book is meticulously edited and beautifully produced. In short, this is a model work.' Alan Silverman, Ancient Philosophy