Nagarjuna also famously relied upon refutation based argumentation ("vitanda") drawing out the consequences ("prasanga") and presuppositions of his opponents' own theories and showing them to be self refuting. Because the "vaitandika" only seeks to disprove his opponents arguments without putting forward a thesis of his own, the Hindu Nyaya school philosophers such as Vatsyayana saw it as unfair and also irrational (because if you argue against P, you must have a thesis, mainly not P). According to Matilal, Nagarjuna's position of not putting forth any implied thesis through his refutations would be rational if seen as a form of illocutionary act.