I was reading a Wikipedia article on fatalism and the idle argument. It says a Stoic philosopher "attempted to refute" it and then it states the argument. The very next line it uses the word "however".
Here's the link and the excerpt
The Idle Argument was anticipated by Aristotle in his De Interpretatione chapter 9. The Stoics considered it to be a sophism and the Stoic Chrysippus attempted to refute it by pointing out that consulting the doctor would be as much fated as recovering. He seems to have introduced the idea that in cases like that at issue two events can be co-fated, so that one cannot occur without the other. It is, however, a false argument because it fails to consider that those fated to recover may be those fated to consult a doctor.
I have two questions regarding "It is, however, a false argument"
Whose argument is being referred to as false, the argument of the idlist or that of the Stoic?
Considering that it is idlist's argument that is being referred to as false, why does it use the word "however"? Because it also uses the words "attempted to refute", does it mean that the Stoic's refutation is incomplete and also the idlist's argument is wrong?